OpenFrontiers
← Back to the index
OP-12074OpenAnalysis

Favard-length decay exponent (C60C_{60})

Favard-length decay exponent: determine C60C_{60} or improve its bounds; the repository records 16\frac{1}{6} (lower) and 1 (upper).

Editorial MSC2020 classification. Original article codes and source evidence are recorded in the literature directory.

Licensed source statementAs of Repository table at commit 2c1968c (2026-09-26); open while the recorded lower and upper bounds differSource & evidence ↓

Problem statement

Let E⊂R2E\subset \mathbb{R}^2 be a planar set. The Favard length of EE is defined by

Fav(E) := 1π∫0π∣Proj RθE∣ dθ,\mathrm{Fav}(E)\ :=\ \frac{1}{\pi}\int_0^\pi \lvert \mathrm{Proj}\,R_\theta E\rvert\, d\theta,

where Proj\mathrm{Proj} is orthogonal projection to the horizontal axis and RθR_\theta is rotation by angle θ\theta. [NPV2011-def-fav]

The Favard length has the following probabilistic interpretation: up to a constant factor, Fav(E)\mathrm{Fav}(E) is the probability that a “Buffon’s needle” (a long line segment dropped at random) hits EE. [NPV2011-buffon-interpretation]

Let CnC_n be the nn-th stage in the construction of the middle-half Cantor set, and let

Kn := Cn×Cn.K_n\ :=\ C_n \times C_n.

Then KnK_n is a union of 4n4^n axis-parallel squares of side length 4−n4^{-n}. [NPV2011-Kn-4n-squares]

A classical theorem of Besicovitch implies that Fav(Kn)→0\mathrm{Fav}(K_n)\to 0 as n→∞n\to\infty, and it remains open to determine the exact rate of decay. [NPV2011-besicovitch-open-decay]

We define the Favard-length decay exponent αFav\alpha_{\mathrm{Fav}} by

C60 := αFav := sup⁡{α≥0: ∃C>0 such that Fav(Kn)≤C n−α for all n∈N}.C_{60}\ :=\ \alpha_{\mathrm{Fav}}\ :=\ \sup\Bigl\{\alpha\ge 0:\ \exists C>0\ \text{such that}\ \mathrm{Fav}(K_n)\le C\,n^{-\alpha}\ \text{for all}\ n\in\mathbb{N}\Bigr\}.

The best established range currently is

16 ≤ αFav ≤ 1.\frac{1}{6}\ \le\ \alpha_{\mathrm{Fav}}\ \le\ 1.

[NPV2011-thm1-powerlaw] [BV2010-thm1-lb-logn-over-n]

Lean 4

Not yet attached

No Lean statement or proof is attached yet. Have a formalization? Share its source to add it to this problem.

Background

  • Prior explicit upper bound. Before the power-law bound, the only explicit upper bound recorded in this literature was of iterated-log type, exp⁡(−c log⁡∗n)\exp(-c\,\log_* n), attributed to Peres–Solomyak. [NPV2011-exp-logstar]

  • Non-optimality and a method barrier. Nazarov–Peres–Volberg remark that the exponent 1/61/6 is not optimal, but that decay faster than O(n−1/4)O(n^{-1/4}) would require new ideas (relative to their methods). [NPV2011-remark-n-1-4]

  • Wikipedia page on Favard length

References (from the repository page)

  • [BV2010] Bateman, Michael; Volberg, Alexander. An estimate from below for the Buffon needle probability of the four-corner Cantor set. Mathematical Research Letters 17 (2010), no. 5, 959–967. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4310/MRL.2010.v17.n5.a12. arXiv PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/0807.2953. Google Scholar

  • [BV2010-thm1-lb-logn-over-n] loc: arXiv v1 PDF p.3, Theorem 1 (display (1.2)) quote: “There exists c>0c>0 such that Fav(Kn)≥c log⁡nn\mathrm{Fav}(K_n)\ge c\,\frac{\log n}{n} for all n∈Nn\in\mathbb{N}.”

  • [NPV2011] Nazarov, Fedor; Peres, Yuval; Volberg, Alexander. The power law for the Buffon needle probability of the four-corner Cantor set. St. Petersburg Mathematical Journal 22 (2011), no. 1, 61–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1090/S1061-0022-2010-01133-6. arXiv PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/0801.2942. Google Scholar

  • [NPV2011-besicovitch-open-decay] loc: arXiv v1 PDF p.1, Abstract (sentences on Besicovitch and open problem) quote: “A classical theorem of Besicovitch implies that the Favard length of KnK_n tends to zero. It is still an open problem to determine its exact rate of decay.”

  • [NPV2011-exp-logstar] loc: arXiv v1 PDF p.1, Abstract (sentence on iterated-log upper bound) quote: “Until recently, the only explicit upper bound was exp⁡(−c log⁡∗n)\exp(-c\,\log_* n), due to Peres and Solomyak.”

  • [NPV2011-def-fav] loc: arXiv v1 PDF p.2, equation (1.1) quote: “Fav(E)=1π∫0π∣Proj RθE∣ dθ\mathrm{Fav}(E)=\frac{1}{\pi}\int_0^\pi \lvert \mathrm{Proj}\,R_\theta E\rvert\,d\theta.”

  • [NPV2011-buffon-interpretation] loc: arXiv v1 PDF p.2, paragraph after (1.1) quote: “it is the probability that the “Buffon’s needle,” a long line segment dropped at random, hits EE”

  • [NPV2011-Kn-4n-squares] loc: arXiv v1 PDF p.2, paragraph after the Buffon-needle interpretation quote: “The set Kn=Cn2K_n=C_n^2 is a union of 4n4^n squares with side length 4−n4^{-n}.”

  • [NPV2011-thm1-powerlaw] loc: arXiv v1 PDF p.3, Theorem 1 quote: “For every δ>0\delta>0, there exists C>0C>0 such that Fav(Kn)≤Cnδ−1/6\mathrm{Fav}(K_n)\le C n^{\delta-1/6} for all n∈Nn\in\mathbb{N}.”

  • [NPV2011-remark-n-1-4] loc: arXiv v1 PDF p.3, Remarks (bullet after Theorem 1) quote: “a bound decaying faster than O(n−1/4)O(n^{-1/4}) would require new ideas.”

Progress & source assessment

Repository table (commit 2c1968c, 26 September 2026): best known lower bound 16\frac{1}{6}; best known upper bound 1. Values marked with an asterisk have minimal verification.

Known upper bounds

Bound Reference Comments
11 [BV2010] Bateman–Volberg prove Fav(Kn)≥c log⁡nn\mathrm{Fav}(K_n)\ge c\,\frac{\log n}{n}, which rules out any estimate Fav(Kn)≤Cn−α\mathrm{Fav}(K_n)\le C n^{-\alpha} with α>1\alpha>1. [BV2010-thm1-lb-logn-over-n]

Known lower bounds

Bound Reference Comments
00 Trivial (since Fav(Kn)\mathrm{Fav}(K_n) is uniformly bounded).
1/61/6 [NPV2011] Nazarov–Peres–Volberg prove Fav(Kn)≤Cn−1/6+δ\mathrm{Fav}(K_n)\le C n^{-1/6+\delta} (equivalently, Fav(Kn)≤Cnδ−1/6\mathrm{Fav}(K_n)\le C n^{\delta-1/6}) for every δ>0\delta>0. [NPV2011-thm1-powerlaw]
References
  1. [1]Davis, Damek; Ivanisvili, Paata; Tao, Terence (maintainers). Optimization Constants in Mathematics, github.com/teorth/optimizationproblems (commit 2c1968c, 26 September 2026). — Favard-length decay exponent ($C_{60}$) linkApache-2.0 (repository license); constant pages reproduced with attribution; repository references retained.

Recorded progress

Add yours →

Nothing recorded yet. A pointer to a paper the entry is missing counts.

Machine attempts

0 recorded

Attempts run against the statement below and are recorded in full, including the failures. The point is to stop the next model — and the next person — from re-walking a road that is already known to end. Each attempt costs 25 credits.

No machine attempts recorded.

Sign in to run an attempt. New accounts start with enough credits for ten.

Discussion

0 notes

Notes are for clarifying the statement, flagging a missing reference, or recording why an approach fails. Claimed solutions belong in a submission, where they can be reviewed.

No notes yet.

Sign in to add a note.