On a Sharp Fourier Extension Inequality on the Circle with Lacunary Spectrum

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.20934
• Title: On a Sharp Fourier Extension Inequality on the Circle with Lacunary Spectrum
• Authors: Felipe Gonçalves, João Paulo Ferreira
• Classification: math.CA (Classical Analysis and ODEs)
• Publication Date: October 23, 2025
• Author Affiliations: University of Texas at Austin & IMPA (Instituto de Matemática Pura e Aplicada), Brazil
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.20934v1

Abstract

This paper establishes a sharp Fourier extension inequality on the circle for the Tomas-Stein exponent, applicable to functions whose spectrum $\{\pm \lambda_n\}$ satisfies $\lambda_{n+1} > 3\lambda_n$. This represents significant progress in the harmonic analysis field concerning Fourier restriction theory.

Research Background and Motivation

Core Problem

This paper investigates a fundamental problem in Fourier restriction theory: the sharp constant of the Tomas-Stein theorem in the two-dimensional case ($d=2$) and the characterization of its extremal functions. Specifically, for functions $f$ on the circle $S^1$, the goal is to determine the optimal constant in the following inequality:

$\|\widehat{f\sigma}\|_{L^6(\mathbb{R}^2)} \leq C_{opt}\|f\|_{L^2(S^1)}$

Research Significance

1. Theoretical Importance: The Tomas-Stein theorem is a central result in modern harmonic analysis, but determining its sharp constant is extremely challenging. Currently, this has been completely resolved only for $d=3$ by Foschi (2015).
2. Conjecture Verification: A widespread conjecture asserts that constant functions are the unique extremal functions for this inequality (modulo symmetries). This paper provides evidence for this conjecture on a specific subspace of functions.
3. Technical Significance: $d=2$ is the last even-dimensional extension problem related to conic sections, naturally attracting substantial attention.

Limitations of Existing Work

1. Ciccone-Gonçalves (2024) proved the conjecture under arithmetic constraints, but required a lacunary constant $q \geq 5$, unable to handle important cases such as $\{0\} \cup \{\pm 2^n\}$ or $\{0\} \cup \{\pm 3^n\}$.
2. Band-limited Function Approach: Oliveira e Silva et al. proved the case where the spectrum lies in $[-120, 120]$, but this cannot be generalized to arbitrary lacunary sequences.
3. Technical Obstacles: When the lacunary constant $q < 3$, the symmetric set $A = \{\pm\lambda_n\}$ is no longer a $P(2)$-set, leading to "mixed-type exceptions" that cause existing methods to fail.

Motivation for This Paper

This paper poses the key question: can the lacunary constant be reduced to values close to 1? Through refined combinatorial analysis and numerical estimation, this paper successfully reduces the lacunary constant to $q > 3$, achieving the first breakthrough beyond $q=5$.

Core Contributions

1. Main Theorem (Theorem 1): For functions with spectrum $\text{spec}(f) \subset A_{\lambda,q} := \{\pm\lambda_n; n \geq 0\}$ satisfying $\lambda_{n+1}/\lambda_n > 3$, the sharp inequality $\|\widehat{f\sigma}\|_{L^6(\mathbb{R}^2)}^6 \leq (2\pi)^4 \left(\int_0^\infty J_0^6(r)r\,dr\right)\|f\|_{L^2(S^1)}^6$ holds, with equality if and only if $\hat{f}(k) = 0$ for all $k \neq 0$ (i.e., $f$ is constant).
2. Key Technical Innovations:
   • Introduces Lemma 4, which completely classifies $P(3)$ exceptional points in $A_{\lambda,q}^3$, reducing them to solutions of two specific equations (6)
   • Develops new methods for handling "mixed-type exceptions," which work effectively even when the set is not a $P(2)$-set
   • Improves lower bound estimates for Bessel function integrals (Lemma 7), enabling more precise numerical verification
3. Breakthrough in Lacunary Constant: Reduces from $q \geq 5$ to $q > 3$, significantly expanding the applicable range to include important examples such as $\{0\} \cup \{\pm 4^n\}$.
4. Methodological Contribution: Provides a systematic framework for handling Fourier extension problems with lacunary spectra, potentially applicable to broader contexts.

Detailed Methodology

Precise Problem Formulation

For $L^2$ functions $f$ on the circle $S^1$, define the Fourier extension operator: $\widehat{f\sigma}(x) = \int_{S^1} f(w)e^{-ix \cdot w}d\sigma(w)$

The goal is to prove Conjecture 1: $\frac{\|\widehat{f\sigma}\|_{L^6(\mathbb{R}^2)}^6}{\|f\|_{L^2(S^1)}^6} \leq C_{opt} = (2\pi)^4 \int_0^\infty J_0^6(r)r\,dr$

where $J_n$ denotes the Bessel function of the first kind.

Core Strategy: Explicit Formulas and Combinatorial Decomposition

Step 1: Explicit Expansion of Norms

Using properties of Bessel functions, the $L^6$ norm can be expanded as: $(2\pi)^{-7}\|\widehat{f\sigma}\|_{L^6(\mathbb{R}^2)}^6 = \sum_{D \in A^3} \sum_{\substack{n_1,\ldots,n_6 \in A \\ n_1+n_2+n_3=D \\ n_4+n_5+n_6=D}} \hat{f}(n_1)\hat{f}(n_2)\hat{f}(n_3)\overline{\hat{f}(n_4)\hat{f}(n_5)\hat{f}(n_6)}I(n_1,\ldots,n_6)$

where $I(n_1,\ldots,n_6) = \int_0^\infty J_{n_1}(r)\cdots J_{n_6}(r)r\,dr$.

Similarly, the $L^2$ norm expands as: $(2\pi)^{-3}\|f\|_{L^2(S^1)}^6 = \sum_{D \in A^3} \sum_{\substack{n_1,n_2,n_3 \in A \\ n_1+n_2+n_3=D}} |\hat{f}(n_1)|^2|\hat{f}(n_2)|^2|\hat{f}(n_3)|^2$

Step 2: $P(3)$-Set Theory

The key is understanding the number of solutions to the equation $D = n_1 + n_2 + n_3$ (with $n_i \in A$). Define:

• $P(3)$ points: $D \in A^3$ such that either there is a unique triple (modulo permutations) summing to $D$, or $D$ has the trivial representation $D = D + m - m$ ($m \in A \cap (-A)$)
• Exceptional points $A_E^3$: Points not satisfying the $P(3)$ property

Step 3: Classification Result of Lemma 4

This is the core technical contribution of the paper. It is proved that $D \in A_E^3$ if and only if one of the following equations has a solution: $\lambda_{n+1} = \lambda_n + \lambda_n + \lambda_n + \lambda_m + \lambda_k, \quad 0 \leq \lambda_m \leq \lambda_k \leq \lambda_n, \lambda_k > 0$$\lambda_{n+1} + \lambda_m = \lambda_n + \lambda_n + \lambda_n + \lambda_k, \quad 0 \leq \lambda_m < \lambda_k \leq \lambda_n$

Proof Strategy:

• Reorganize the equation $n_1 + n_2 + n_3 = n_4 + n_5 + n_6$ into a form containing only positive numbers
• Utilize the lacunary property: if $\lambda_{n+1} > \max\{\lambda_{\beta_j}\}$, then $3\lambda_s < \lambda_{n+1} \leq 5\lambda_s$, implying $s=n$
• Derive specific relationships between $\lambda_{n+1}$ and smaller terms

Important Observation (Remark 6): Each $D \in A_E^3$ has exactly two distinct triple representations, with at least one triple containing repeated elements.

Technical Innovations

Innovation 1: Handling Failure of $P(2)$ Property

When $q < 5$, $A$ is no longer a $P(2)$-set, producing "mixed-type exceptions": $D + m - m = n_1 + n_2 + n_3 \quad \text{with } n_i + n_j \neq 0$

This paper further decomposes $A_E^3$ into $A_1^3$ (both triples have repeated elements) and $A_2^3$ (only one has repeated elements), selecting different parameters $\epsilon_D$ for each case.

Innovation 2: Improved Inequality Techniques

Uses a parameterized fundamental inequality: $r^3 \leq \frac{b}{2b-2}r^4 + \frac{1}{2b-2}s^4 + \frac{b-3}{2b-2}r^2s^2, \quad \forall b > 1$

By optimizing the parameter $b$ (choosing $b=6.66$), tighter bounds are obtained.

Innovation 3: Precise Estimation of Bessel Integrals (Lemma 7)

Define $F(n_1,n_2,n_3) = I(0,0,0)/I(n_1,n_1,n_2,n_2,n_3,n_3)$, proving:

• $F(n,0,0) \geq 5$ ($n \geq 1$)
• $F(n,n,0) > 10.8$ ($n \geq 3$)
• $F(n,n,n) > 3.2$
• $F(n,n,m) > 13.2$ ($n \neq m$, $n,m \in \{\lambda_n\}$)
• $F(n,m,k) > 21$ ($n > m > k$, $n,m,k \in \{\lambda_n\}$)

Proof Method:

• For large values, use asymptotic estimates: $F$ grows as $\Omega(\max\{n_i\}^{1/3})$
• For small values, use Lemma 8's numerical approximation formula, computed via the PARI-GP system
• Combine both approaches to cover all cases

Proof Framework of Main Theorem

Step 1: Decompose $S = (2\pi)^{-7}\|\widehat{f\sigma}\|_{L^6}^6 = S_{P(3)} + S_E$

Step 2: Apply Cauchy-Schwarz and triangle inequality to $S_E$: $I(n_1,\ldots,n_6) \leq \sqrt{I(n_1,n_2,n_3)I(n_4,n_5,n_6)}$

Using $2xy \leq x^2/\epsilon + \epsilon y^2$, introduce parameters $\epsilon_D$: $S_E \leq \sum_{D \in A_E^3} \left[\left(1 + \frac{1}{\epsilon_D}\right)(\text{first triple term}) + (1+\epsilon_D)(\text{second triple term})\right]$

Step 3: Further subdivide $A_E^3 = A_1^3 \cup A_2^3$, selecting different $\epsilon_D$ for each case.

Step 4: Establish an inequality system (9)-(13), requiring: $\text{(coefficient)} \leq (\text{constant multiple of}) F(n_1,n_2,n_3)$

Step 5: Use Lemma 7 to verify all inequalities hold. The key is:

• System (9): fundamental inequality, holds for all lacunary sequences
• Systems (10)-(13): involve exceptional points, requiring verification against Lemma 4's classification

Step 6: For small values (e.g., $|n_1| \in \{1,2\}$), use Lemma 4 to determine specific $\{|m_1|,|m_2|\}$ values, then verify numerically. For example:

• If $|n_1|=1$, then $\{|m_1|,|m_2|\}=\{1,4\}$, numerical verification shows $F(m_1,m_1,m_2) > 17.3$
• If $|n_1|=2$, then $\{|m_1|,|m_2|\}=\{2,8\}$

Conclusion: All inequalities hold strictly (Lemma 7's inequalities are all strict), therefore equality holds if and only if $\text{spec}(f)=\{0\}$.

Experimental Setup

Numerical Computation Tools

This paper uses the PARI-GP (version 2.15.3) computer algebra system for numerical verification.

Computational Tasks

1. Bessel Function Zeros: Compute the sequence of non-negative zeros $\{\sigma_r\}_{r \geq 0}$ of $J_1$
2. Integral Approximation: Use Lemma 8's summation formula to compute $\tilde{I}(k,m,n)$, where: $\tilde{I}(k,m,n) = \frac{2}{9}\sum_{r=0}^{1000} \frac{J_k^2(\sigma_r/3)J_m^2(\sigma_r/3)J_n^2(\sigma_r/3)}{J_0^2(\sigma_r)}$
3. Error Control: Prove that $0 < I(k,m,n) - \tilde{I}(k,m,n) < 10^{-2}$ (when $\max\{k,m,n\} \leq 532$)

Verification Range

• For $n \geq 3$, verifying $F(n,n,0) > 10.8$ requires checking $3 \leq n < 21$
• For $n,m$ in lacunary sequences, verifying $F(n,n,m) > 13.2$ requires checking $\max\{n,m\} < 110$
• For three distinct lacunary elements, verifying $F(k,m,n) > 21$ requires checking $n < 340$

Precision Requirements

All numerical inequality verifications have precision at least $10^{-2}$, sufficient to ensure the rigor of the theoretical proof.

Experimental Results

Main Result Verification

Complete Proof of Theorem 1: Through the combination of numerical computation and theoretical analysis, all necessary inequality systems have been successfully verified.

Key Numerical Results (from Lemma 7 verification):

• $F(1,0,0) = 5$ (exact value, equality holds)
• $F(1,1,0) \approx 7.94$
• $F(3,3,0) > 10.8$
• $F(1,1,1) > 3.2$
• For small value cases $(n,m) \in \{(1,4), (2,8)\}$, etc., the values of $F(n,n,m)$ are sufficiently large to ensure the inequalities hold

Concrete Example Analysis (Example 5)

Case 1: $A_5 = \{0\} \cup \{\pm 5^{n-1}; n \geq 1\}$

Equation (6) simplifies to: $5^{n+1} = 5^n + 5^n + 5^n + 5^n + 5^n$

Conclusion: All $P(3)$ exceptional points are $\{\pm 3 \cdot 5^n; n \geq 0\}$, which modulo $\pm 5^n$ simplifies to the single expression $3 = 5-1-1 = 1+1+1$.

Case 2: $A_4 = \{0\} \cup \{\pm 4^{n-1}; n \geq 1\}$

Equation (6) simplifies to: $4^{n+1} = 4^n + 4^n + 4^n + 4^n$

Conclusion: All $P(3)$ exceptional points are $\{\pm 2 \cdot 4^n; n \geq 0\} \cup \{\pm 3 \cdot 4^n; n \geq 0\}$, corresponding to two simple expressions:

• $2 = 4-1-1 = 1+1+0$
• $3 = 4-1+0 = 1+1+1$

Parameter Selection Verification

Optimization of Parameter $b$: Through constraints of inequality (9), determine $4.2 \leq b \leq 6.6604$, finally selecting $b = 6.66$.

Selection of $\epsilon_D$:

• System (11): $\epsilon_D = 2$
• System (13): $\epsilon_D = 1$
• System (12) ($|n_1|=1$): $0.270 < \epsilon_D < 0.289$
• System (12) ($|n_1|=2$): $0.110 < \epsilon_D < 0.490$
• System (10) ($m_2 \neq 0$): $\epsilon_D = 2$
• System (10) ($m_2 = 0$): $\epsilon_D = 1$

All selections have positive margins, ensuring the inequalities hold strictly.

Uniqueness of Extremal Functions

Since all inequalities in Lemma 7 are strict (except for the single equality case $F(1,0,0)=5$, which does not affect the final conclusion), all estimates in the theorem proof are strict inequalities. Therefore:

Conclusion: Equality $\|\widehat{f\sigma}\|_{L^6}^6 = C_{opt}\|f\|_{L^2}^6$ holds if and only if $\text{spec}(f) = \{0\}$, i.e., $f$ is constant.

This completely verifies Conjecture 1 for the case of lacunary constant $q > 3$.

Related Work

Development of Fourier Restriction Theory

1. Tomas-Stein Theorem (Classical Result): $\|\widehat{f\sigma}\|_{L^{\frac{2(d+1)}{d-1}}(\mathbb{R}^d)} \leq C\|f\|_{L^2(S^{d-1})}$ This is the cornerstone of Fourier restriction theory, but determining the optimal constant $C$ is extremely challenging.
2. Foschi (2015) 11: Proved that for $d=3$, constant functions are the unique extremal functions (modulo symmetries), which is currently the only completely resolved dimension.
3. Local Extremal Function Research:
   • Carneiro et al. (2017) 4: Proved constant functions are local extremal functions ($d=2$)
   • Gonçalves-Negro (2022) 12: Extended results to $2 \leq d \leq 60$

Partial Progress on Sharp Constants

4. Shao (2016) 17: Proved existence of extremal functions for $d=2$, showing that extremal functions are even, non-negative, and smooth.
5. Band-limited Function Approach:
   • Oliveira e Silva et al. (2022) 16: $\text{spec}(f) \subset [-30,30]$
   • Barker et al. (2023) 1: Improved to $\text{spec}(f) \subset [-120,120]$

Results Under Arithmetic Constraints

6. Ciccone-Gonçalves (2024) 9: Direct predecessor of this paper
   • Introduced the concept of $P(3)$-sets
   • Proved sharp inequalities under Sidon set generalizations
   • Limitation: Required lacunary constant $q \geq 5$, unable to handle $q \in (3,5)$ cases
   • This paper precisely breaks through this limitation

Other Related Directions

7. Other Geometric Objects:
   • Negro et al. (2023) 14: Extension inequalities for conic sections
   • Carneiro et al. (2024) 6: Sharp extensions on spheres in arbitrary dimensions
   • González-Riquelme et al. (2024) 13: Extension inequalities over finite fields
8. Stability Theory:
   • Carneiro et al. (2024) 5: Stability studies of spherical Fourier restriction

Positioning of This Paper

Building on the Ciccone-Gonçalves work, this paper achieves important breakthroughs through:

• Technical Improvements: Complete classification of Lemma 4 + precise estimation of Lemma 7
• Expanded Range: $q \geq 5 \rightarrow q > 3$
• Methodology: Provides systematic methods for handling non-$P(2)$-sets

Compared to the band-limited function approach, this paper addresses a completely different function class (lacunary spectrum vs. compactly supported spectrum), and the two are complementary.

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Significance of Theorem 1: First proof that Conjecture 1 holds for lacunary constant $q > 3$, with constant functions as the unique extremal functions. This extends the applicable range from $q \geq 5$ to $q > 3$, representing significant progress on this problem.
2. Methodological Contributions:
   • Provides a systematic combinatorial classification framework (Lemma 4)
   • Develops techniques for handling "mixed-type exceptions"
   • Establishes effective integration of theoretical analysis and numerical computation
3. Partial Verification of Conjecture: Provides strong evidence for Conjecture 1 on a broader class of functions, supporting the universal conjecture that "constant functions are the unique extremal functions."

Limitations

1. Restriction of Lacunary Constant:
   • Current methods require $q > 3$, unable to handle $1 < q \leq 3$ cases
   • In particular, $\{0\} \cup \{\pm 2^n\}$ ($q=2$) and $\{0\} \cup \{\pm 3^n\}$ ($q=3$) remain uncovered
   • Authors explicitly state in Section 1.2 that new ideas are needed for $q < 3$
2. Dependence on Numerical Computation:
   • Proof relies on numerical verification of small value cases (via PARI-GP)
   • While precision is sufficient ($< 10^{-2}$ error), ideally a pure analytical proof would be preferred
   • Computational burden may become prohibitive as lacunary constant approaches 3
3. Specificity of Methods:
   • Highly dependent on lacunary structure, difficult to generalize to arbitrary sparse sets
   • For non-symmetric spectral sets, methods require substantial modification
4. Distance from Complete Resolution of Conjecture 1:
   • Even if lacunary constant is reduced to near 1, this covers only special function classes
   • The gap from lacunary spectrum to general $L^2$ functions remains vast
   • No new insights provided for the general case
5. Limitations of Experimental Section:
   • No PARI-GP code or detailed computational procedures provided
   • Numerical results only verify inequality satisfaction, not deeper properties of $F$ function
   • Lacks numerical experiments for critical cases (e.g., when $q$ approaches 3)

Future Directions

Directions Explicitly Proposed by Authors:

1. Reducing Lacunary Constant:

   "New ideas are needed to tackle the problem with lacunary spectrum with constant $1 + \epsilon$ for $\epsilon$ small."

   
   Challenges include:
   • When $q < 3$, the number of solutions to equation (6) increases dramatically
   • Structure of mixed-type exceptions becomes more complex
   • May require deeper properties of Bessel integrals
2. Boundary Case $q=3$:
   • $\{0\} \cup \{\pm 3^n\}$ is a particularly important test case
   • Example 5 already analyzes its exceptional structure (only one basic exception $3 = 5-1-1 = 1+1+1$)
   • May require targeted techniques for this critical case

Other Potential Directions:

3. General Sparse Sets:
   • Can results be generalized to non-lacunary but sufficiently sparse sets?
   • How to quantify the "sufficiently sparse" condition?
4. Higher-Dimensional Generalization:
   • Can this paper's methods apply to lacunary spectrum cases in $d \geq 3$?
   • Combinatorial complexity will increase significantly in higher dimensions
5. Improved Computational Methods:
   • Develop more efficient numerical algorithms for Bessel integrals
   • Seek more precise asymptotic expansions for $F(n_1,n_2,n_3)$
6. Complete Resolution of Conjecture 1:
   • Proving the conjecture for general $L^2(S^1)$ functions remains open
   • Requires breakthrough ideas, possibly involving completely different approaches

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Strong Technical Innovation

• Lemma 4's classification result is the paper's core contribution, reducing abstract $P(3)$ exceptional problems to two concrete equations, demonstrating profound combinatorial insight
• Techniques for handling non-$P(2)$-sets are novel, overcoming fundamental obstacles in prior work
• Optimization of parameterized inequalities (choosing $b=6.66$) reflects refined technical control

2. Perfect Integration of Theory and Computation

• Problem decomposed into: asymptotic analysis for large values + numerical verification for small values
• Lemma 8 provides reliable numerical approximation tools (error controlled at $10^{-2}$)
• All numerical computations have explicit ranges and precision guarantees, ensuring proof rigor

3. Significance of Results

• Reducing lacunary constant from 5 to 3 is substantive progress, covering important examples like $\{0\} \cup \{\pm 4^n\}$
• Example 5 clearly demonstrates method's power, simplifying complex exceptional structures to simple expressions
• Proof of extremal function uniqueness (equality conditions) is complete

4. Clear Paper Writing

• Introduction adequately explains problem background and technical difficulties
• Key lemmas (Lemmas 4, 7, 8) stated clearly with rigorous proofs
• Example 5 provides excellent intuitive understanding
• Explicitly identifies method limitations and future directions

5. Methodological Value

• Provides systematic framework for studying Fourier extension problems with lacunary spectra
• Paradigm of combinatorial classification + Bessel integral estimation may apply to other problems
• Provides clear roadmap for further reducing lacunary constant

Weaknesses

1. Limited Applicability of Methods

• Powerless for $q \leq 3$, authors themselves acknowledge need for "new ideas"
• Highly dependent on lacunary structure, difficult to generalize to arbitrary sparse sets
• Applicability to non-symmetric spectra unclear

2. Dependence on Numerical Computation

• While precision is sufficient, ideally pure analytical proof would be preferred
• For $q \to 3^+$ cases, computational burden may become bottleneck
• Numerical verification ranges (e.g., $n < 340$) are sufficient but lack theoretical necessity explanation

3. Complexity of Technical Details

• Inequality systems (9)-(13) are very cumbersome, involving multiple case classifications
• Parameter $\epsilon_D$ selection strategy, while effective, lacks unified theoretical guidance
• Some proof parts (e.g., definition of parameter $a \in \{-1,0,1\}$) appear somewhat technical

4. Distance from Complete Resolution of Conjecture 1

• Even reducing lacunary constant to near 1 covers only special function classes
• Gap from lacunary spectrum to general $L^2$ functions remains vast
• Provides no new insights for general case

5. Experimental Section Limitations

• No PARI-GP code or detailed computational procedures provided
• Numerical results only verify inequality satisfaction, not deeper $F$ function properties
• Lacks numerical experiments for critical cases (e.g., when $q$ approaches 3)

Impact Assessment

Contribution to Field:

• Achieves substantive progress on sharp constant problem in Fourier restriction theory
• Provides strong evidence for Conjecture 1 on broader function classes
• Developed technical tools (Lemma 4's classification framework) may inspire subsequent research

Practical Value:

• Direct applications limited (this is pure mathematical theory research)
• However, Fourier restriction theory has important applications in PDEs, geometric measure theory, etc.
• Methodology has reference value for related problems (extension inequalities for other geometric objects)

Reproducibility:

• Theoretical proof completely verifiable (based on published lemmas and standard techniques)
• Numerical computation reproducible (using public PARI-GP system)
• Complete reproduction requires some effort without provided code

Long-term Impact:

• If lacunary constant successfully reduced to near 1 in future, this paper's techniques will be important foundation
• If Conjecture 1 ultimately completely proved, this paper will be key milestone
• Even if final proof uses completely different methods, this paper's understanding of lacunary cases has independent value

Applicable Scenarios

Direct Application:

• $L^2(S^1)$ functions with spectrum $\{\pm \lambda_n\}$ satisfying $\lambda_{n+1}/\lambda_n > 3$
• Particularly: $\{0\} \cup \{\pm 4^n\}$, $\{0\} \cup \{\pm 5^n\}$, etc. (geometric progressions)

Potential Generalizations:

• May apply to cases with lacunary constant slightly less than 3 (requires more numerical work)
• Method framework may apply to other lacunary structure harmonic analysis problems
• Combinatorial classification techniques may be useful in other problems involving multiple summations

Not Applicable:

• General $L^2(S^1)$ functions (remains open problem)
• Cases with lacunary constant near 1 (requires new ideas)
• Non-lacunary sparse sets (methods depend on strong lacunary property)

Comprehensive Evaluation

• Innovativeness: ★★★★☆ (4.5/5) - Achieves important breakthrough within existing framework, but doesn't open entirely new directions
• Rigor: ★★★★★ (5/5) - Complete rigorous proof, numerical computations have sufficient guarantees
• Importance: ★★★★☆ (4/5) - Substantive progress on specific problem, but distance from complete resolution remains
• Clarity: ★★★★☆ (4.5/5) - Clear writing, but technical details are complex
• Impact: ★★★★☆ (4/5) - Will become important reference in this research direction

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality theoretical mathematics paper achieving solid progress on a difficult problem in Fourier restriction theory. While complete resolution of Conjecture 1 remains distant, the technical tools developed and partial results obtained have significant value. For researchers working in harmonic analysis, particularly Fourier restriction theory, this is essential reading.

Selected References

Works This Paper Directly Builds Upon:

• 9 V. Ciccone and F. Gonçalves. Sharp Fourier extension on the circle under arithmetic constraints. J. Funct. Anal., 286(2):Paper No. 110219, 2024.

Foundational Works in Fourier Restriction Theory:

• 11 D. Foschi. Global maximizers for the sphere adjoint Fourier restriction inequality. J. Funct. Anal., 268(3):690–702, 2015.
• 4 E. Carneiro, D. Foschi, D. Oliveira e Silva, and C. Thiele. A sharp trilinear inequality related to Fourier restriction on the circle. Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 33(4):1463–1486, 2017.

Band-limited Function Approach:

• 16 D. Oliveira e Silva, C. Thiele, and P. Zorin-Kranich. Band-limited maximizers for a Fourier extension inequality on the circle. Exp. Math., 31(1):192–198, 2022.
• 1 J. Barker, C. Thiele, and P. Zorin-Kranich. Band-limited maximizers for a Fourier extension inequality on the circle, II. Exp. Math., 32(2):280–293, 2023.

Existence of Extremal Functions:

• 17 S. Shao. On existence of extremizers for the Tomas-Stein inequality for $S^1$. J. Funct. Anal., 270(10):3996–4038, 2016.

Report Completion Date: 2025 (based on paper publication date October 27, 2025)