For a rank-three finite abelian group G=Cn1⊕Cn2⊕Cn3G = C_{n_1}\oplus C_{n_2}\oplus C_{n_3} with 1<n1∣n2∣n31<n_1|n_2|n_3, the Davenport constant D(G)D(G) — the smallest length forcing a nonempty zero-sum subsequence in any sequence over GG — is not known exactly, and the best uniform upper bound has the form D(G)≤D∗(G)+(a3−3)(n1−1)D(G) \le D^*(G)+(a_3-3)(n_1-1), where D∗(G)=n1+n2+n3−2D^*(G)=n_1+n_2+n_3-2 and a3a_3 is the optimal constant controlling the short zero-sum constant η(Cn3)\eta(C_n^3). Zakarczemny (2019/2021) proved a3≤20369a_3 \le 20369 and conjectured (Conjecture 3.12, motivated by a conjecture of Gao and Thangadurai, under which one may surmise the conjectural value a3=8a_3=8) that D∗(G)≤D(G)≤D∗(G)+5(n1−1)D^*(G) \le D(G) \le D^*(G)+5(n_1-1) — a bound which follows from a3≤8a_3 \le 8 via the quotient-group induction described below; only a3≥7a_3 \ge 7 is known. As of 2026, no improvement of a3a_3, no resolution of the conjecture, and no exact determination of D(G)D(G) for general rank-three groups is known. The problem — proving or refuting Conjecture 3.12, improving the explicit constant a3≤20369a_3 \le 20369 that controls the best uniform bound of this form, and, at full strength, exactly determining D(G)D(G) for general rank-three groups — remains open.

Background

A sequence over a finite abelian group GG (written additively) is a collection of elements of GG in which repetition is allowed; a zero-sum subsequence is a nonempty sub-collection whose elements add up to 00. The Davenport constant D(G)D(G) is the smallest integer tt such that every sequence over GG of length at least tt contains a nonempty zero-sum subsequence; equivalently, one more than the maximal length of a zero-sumfree sequence (a sequence with no nonempty zero-sum subsequence). It is a central invariant of zero-sum theory, with applications to factorization theory, additive combinatorics, and lattice-point problems. Every finite abelian group decomposes uniquely as G≅Cn1⊕Cn2⊕⋯⊕CnrG \cong C_{n_1}\oplus C_{n_2}\oplus\cdots\oplus C_{n_r} with cyclic summands of orders 1<n1∣n2∣⋯∣nr1<n_1|n_2|\cdots|n_r; rr is the rank of GG and nr=exp⁡(G)n_r=\exp(G) its exponent. An elementary counting argument gives the lower bound D∗(G)=1+∑i(ni−1)≤D(G)D^*(G)=1+\sum_i (n_i-1) \le D(G). Classical theorems of Olson (1969) establish D(G)=D∗(G)D(G)=D^*(G) for all pp-groups (finite groups whose order is a power of the prime pp; every rank) and for all groups of rank at most two. Geroldinger and Schneider (1992) constructed infinitely many groups of ranks four and five with D(G)>D∗(G)D(G)>D^*(G), so the equality question — and more generally the exact determination of D(G)D(G) — is open precisely in rank three, where it is a well-studied problem that has resisted decades of work.

Two relatives of D(G)D(G) control the rank-three bounds. The short zero-sum constant η(G)\eta(G) is the smallest tt such that every sequence over GG of length at least tt contains a nonempty zero-sum subsequence of length at most exp⁡(G)\exp(G); the Erdős–Ginzburg–Ziv constant s(G)\mathsf{s}(G) is the analogous constant for zero-sum subsequences of length exactly exp⁡(G)\exp(G). Define ara_r as the optimal constant with η(Cnr)≤ar(n−1)+1\eta(C_n^r) \le a_r(n-1)+1 for all nn; one knows a1=1a_1=1, a2=3a_2=3, and (by constructions due to Girard) 2r−1≤ar2^r-1 \le a_r, so 7≤a37 \le a_3. A standard quotient-group induction (for G=Cn1⊕Cn2⊕Cn3G=C_{n_1}\oplus C_{n_2}\oplus C_{n_3}, quotient by a subgroup H≅Cn2/n1⊕Cn3/n1H \cong C_{n_2/n_1}\oplus C_{n_3/n_1} so that G/H≅Cn13G/H \cong C_{n_1}^3, using D(G)≤DD(H)(G/H)D(G) \le D_{D(H)}(G/H), where Dk(G)D_k(G) — the kk-th higher Davenport constant — is the smallest length forcing kk pairwise disjoint nonempty zero-sum subsequences, together with Dk(G)≤exp⁡(G)(k−1)+η(G)D_k(G) \le \exp(G)(k-1)+\eta(G)) then yields D(G)≤D∗(G)+(a3−3)(n1−1)D(G) \le D^*(G)+(a_3-3)(n_1-1), so the resulting uniform bound on how far D(G)D(G) can exceed D∗(G)D^*(G) on rank-three groups, uniformly in the invariant factors, is governed by a3a_3.

The best known value of a3a_3 comes from lattice-point machinery: Alon and Dubiner (1995) proved s(Cpr)≤c(r)p\mathsf{s}(C_p^r) \le c(r)p for primes pp with an explicit recursive constant, c(3)<20233.005c(3)<20233.005; Edel, Elsholtz, Geroldinger, Kubertin and Rackham (2007) showed how such prime-case bounds on s\mathsf{s} lift to all composite nn; and Chintamani, Moriya, Gao, Paul and Thangadurai (2012) and, in the a3a_3 formulation, Zakarczemny (2019; published 2021) combined these tools with the induction above to get D(G)≤D∗(G)+20366(n1−1)D(G) \le D^*(G)+20366(n_1-1), i.e. a3≤20369a_3 \le 20369 — more than three orders of magnitude above the conjectured value. On the asymptotic side, Girard (2018) proved D(Cnr)∼rnD(C_n^r) \sim rn as n→∞n\to\infty, so the gap D−D∗D-D^* is o(n)o(n); but this result yields no effective uniform constant of the ara_r type and no exact values. On the conjectural side, Gao and Thangadurai (2006) studied the constants sk(G)\mathsf{s}_k(G) guaranteeing zero-sum subsequences of prescribed length kexp⁡(G)k\exp(G), and their Conjecture 0 on the rank-three group Cn3C_n^3 leads (as recorded by Zakarczemny) to the expectation a3=8a_3=8; Gao's conjecture η(G)+exp⁡(G)−1=s(G)\eta(G)+\exp(G)-1=\mathsf{s}(G), true in rank at most two, connects a3a_3 to the still-open exact value of the Erdős–Ginzburg–Ziv constant of Cn3C_n^3. Zakarczemny's Conjecture 3.12 asserts the resulting uniform bound D∗(G)≤D(G)≤D∗(G)+5(n1−1)D^*(G) \le D(G) \le D^*(G)+5(n_1-1) for all rank-three GG. Exact values of D(G)D(G) are known only for special families, e.g. the groups C2⊕Cn2⊕Cn3C_2\oplus C_{n_2}\oplus C_{n_3} with 2∣n2∣n32|n_2|n_3 settled by Girard and Schmid (2019).

Problem Statement

Sharpen the uniform upper bound on how far D(G)D(G) can exceed D∗(G)D^*(G) on rank-three groups G=Cn1⊕Cn2⊕Cn3G=C_{n_1}\oplus C_{n_2}\oplus C_{n_3}, where 1<n1∣n2∣n31<n_1|n_2|n_3 and D∗(G)=n1+n2+n3−2D^*(G)=n_1+n_2+n_3-2. The optimal constant a3a_3 in η(Cn3)≤a3(n−1)+1\eta(C_n^3) \le a_3(n-1)+1 controls, via the quotient-group induction of the Background, the best uniform bound of the form D(Cn1⊕Cn2⊕Cn3)≤D∗(G)+(a3−3)(n1−1)D(C_{n_1}\oplus C_{n_2}\oplus C_{n_3}) \le D^*(G)+(a_3-3)(n_1-1) obtainable through that induction; a3a_3 itself is not recovered from the values of D(G)D(G), so the levels below are formulated directly in terms of the DD-bounds. The problem has three sharpness levels of this one objective — pinning down how far D(G)D(G) can exceed D∗(G)D^*(G) on rank-three groups. Level (1) is Conjecture 3.12 of Zakarczemny, the exact-value question of level (3) is open, and level (2) is a weaker explicit-improvement direction relative to the proved bound a3≤20369a_3 \le 20369:

(1) Prove or refute Conjecture 3.12 of Zakarczemny: for every rank-three group G=Cn1⊕Cn2⊕Cn3G=C_{n_1}\oplus C_{n_2}\oplus C_{n_3} with 1<n1∣n2∣n31<n_1|n_2|n_3, D∗(G)≤D(G)≤D∗(G)+5(n1−1)D^*(G) \le D(G) \le D^*(G)+5(n_1-1) — a bound which follows from a3≤8a_3 \le 8 via the quotient-group induction; since a3≥7a_3 \ge 7 is known, the conjectured optimal value is a3=8a_3=8 (the expectation derived from the conjecture of Gao and Thangadurai).

(2) Independently of (1), improve the known explicit constant: establish a fully proved uniform bound D(G)≤D∗(G)+(C−3)(n1−1)D(G) \le D^*(G)+(C-3)(n_1-1) valid for all rank-three groups, for some explicit C<20369C<20369; in particular, proving a3≤Ca_3 \le C achieves this.

(3) The overarching, strongest form is the exact determination of D(G)D(G) for general rank-three groups — in particular, deciding whether every rank-three group satisfies D(G)=D∗(G)D(G)=D^*(G), the last open rank of the classical Olson equality question.

These levels are related but not strictly nested: a proof of a3≤8a_3 \le 8 would settle (1) and give (2) with C=8C=8, and an exact determination at level (3) would settle (1); however, refuting Conjecture 3.12 by an explicit witness would resolve (1) without yielding any proved explicit C<20369C<20369, which is why (2) is stated independently of (1). The three levels are independent targets, and level (3) is the strongest form of the objective.

References

  1. Maciej Zakarczemny, Note on the Davenport's constant for finite abelian groups with rank three, arXiv:1910.10984 (2019); published as Note on the Davenport constant for finite abelian groups with rank three, Acta Mathematica Universitatis Comenianae (N.S.) 90(1) (2021) 1-6, Zbl 1485.11145. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1910.10984, https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.10984
  2. John E. Olson, A combinatorial problem on finite Abelian groups, I, Journal of Number Theory 1 (1969) 8-10. DOI: 10.1016/0022-314X(69)90021-3, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-314X(69)90021-3
  3. John E. Olson, A combinatorial problem on finite Abelian groups, II, Journal of Number Theory 1 (1969) 195-199. DOI: 10.1016/0022-314X(69)90037-7, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-314X(69)90037-7
  4. Alfred Geroldinger, Rudolf Schneider, On Davenport's constant, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A 61(1) (1992) 147-152. DOI: 10.1016/0097-3165(92)90061-X, https://doi.org/10.1016/0097-3165(92)90061-X
  5. Noga Alon, Moshe Dubiner, A lattice point problem and additive number theory, Combinatorica 15 (1995) 301-309. DOI: 10.1007/BF01299737, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01299737
  6. Y. Edel, C. Elsholtz, A. Geroldinger, S. Kubertin, L. Rackham, Zero-sum problems in finite abelian groups and affine caps, The Quarterly Journal of Mathematics 58(2) (2007) 159-186. DOI: 10.1093/qmath/ham003, https://doi.org/10.1093/qmath/ham003
  7. Weidong Gao, Ravindranathan Thangadurai, On zero-sum sequences of prescribed length, Aequationes Mathematicae 72(3) (2006) 201-212. DOI: 10.1007/s00010-006-2841-y, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00010-006-2841-y
  8. M. N. Chintamani, B. K. Moriya, W. D. Gao, P. Paul, R. Thangadurai, New upper bounds for the Davenport and for the Erdős–Ginzburg–Ziv constants, Archiv der Mathematik 98(2) (2012) 133-142. DOI: 10.1007/s00013-011-0345-z, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00013-011-0345-z
  9. Benjamin Girard, An asymptotically tight bound for the Davenport constant, Journal de l'École polytechnique — Mathématiques 5 (2018) 605-611. DOI: 10.5802/jep.79, arXiv:1709.08033, https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.08033
  10. Benjamin Girard, Wolfgang Schmid, Direct zero-sum problems for certain groups of rank three, Journal of Number Theory 197 (2019) 297-316. DOI: 10.1016/j.jnt.2018.08.016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnt.2018.08.016; arXiv:1806.07636, https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.07636
  11. Maciej Zakarczemny, On the zero-sum constant, the Davenport constant and their analogues (published as The zero-sum constant, the Davenport constant and their analogues), Technical Transactions (2020), e2020027, 1-14; arXiv:1905.07648 (2019). DOI: 10.37705/techtrans/e2020027, https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.07648
  12. Anamitro Biswas, Eshita Mazumdar, Davenport constant for finite abelian groups with higher rank, Mathematical Notes 118 (2025) 23-34; arXiv:2402.09999 (2024). DOI: 10.1134/S0001434624605483, https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.09999
  13. Weidong Gao, Siao Hong, Jiangtao Peng, On zero-sum subsequences of length k exp(G), II, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A 187 (2022), Article 105563. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcta.2021.105563, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2021.105563
  14. Siao Hong, Kevin Zhao, On the zero-sum subsequences of modular restricted lengths, Discrete Mathematics 347 (2024), Article 113967. DOI: 10.1016/j.disc.2024.113967, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2024.113967