MathLabs

Worked solution: The polynomial method resolves the cap set problem (Croot-Lev-Pach, Ellenberg-Gijswijt, 2016)

Step 5 of 7: A dimension count turns the rank bound into a size bound
In plain words

To finish, Ellenberg and Gijswijt do not pick just one clever polynomial PP -- they look at the entire space of degree-dd polynomials that vanish outside −A-A, which is large whenever AA is large, and squeeze it through the rank bound from Step 3 to get a direct algebraic inequality relating the sizes mdm_d, qnq^n and ∣A∣|A|.

∣A∣≤3 m(q−1)n/3|A| \le 3\, m_{(q-1)n/3}
Detailed analysis

Ellenberg and Gijswijt (2017, proof of Theorem 4) let VV be the subspace of Sn≤dS_n^{\le d} consisting of polynomials vanishing everywhere outside −A-A; since vanishing at each of the qn−∣A∣q^n-|A| points outside −A-A is one linear condition, dim⁡V≥md−(qn−∣A∣)\dim V \ge m_d - (q^n-|A|). By Step 4, every P∈VP \in V automatically satisfies the hypothesis of Proposition 2 with α=β=γ=1\alpha=\beta=\gamma=1, so Proposition 2 bounds how many points of AA can have P(−a)≠0P(-a) \ne 0; combining this with the dimension count on VV yields md−qn+∣A∣≤2md/2m_d - q^n + |A| \le 2m_{d/2}, i.e. ∣A∣≤2md/2+(qn−md)|A| \le 2m_{d/2} + (q^n - m_d). Choosing the optimal split d=2(q−1)n/3d = 2(q-1)n/3 and using a symmetry of the monomial counts mdm_d collapses this to the clean bound ∣A∣≤3 m(q−1)n/3|A| \le 3\, m_{(q-1)n/3}.