Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Statement
Notation: is the largest number of elements of an admissible sequence in an interval of length , as defined on the page for Conjecture B.
Result (§ 3, printed p. 1717; unnumbered). The authors exhibit
- an admissible sequence of points in an interval of length , while ;
- an admissible subsequence of it of points in an interval of length , while , given by its residue-class description in Table 4 (p. 1717).
Hence and . The paper sets these against the earlier examples it recalls on p. 1717: Hensley, Richards and Stenberg's , and Vehka and Richards's admissible sequence of points in length , where .
The result is unconditional and concerns admissible sequences, not primes. By the prime -tuples conjecture (Conjecture A, p. 1713), each such sequence would have infinitely many translates consisting of primes, giving intervals of length with more primes than ; the paper does not prove that any such translate exists.
Source. David A. Clark and Norman C. Jarvis, "Dense admissible sequences," Mathematics of Computation 70(236) (2001), 1713--1718, https://doi.org/10.1090/s0025-5718-01-01348-5; § 3, p. 1717. The edition read is identified on the source card.
Read depth. Claims checked: the statements and Table 4 were read on the page image of p. 1717. The admissibility of the sequences was not recomputed and nothing here is independently reviewed.
Proof pointer
§ 3, p. 1717. The authors pick lengths with small, try every combination of erased residue classes for the first primes, and for each later prime erase the class removing the fewest surviving elements. With this gave the 715-point sequence in about nine days of computation; a search inside it for a denser shorter stretch gave the 657-point subsequence.
Dependencies
None beyond the computation.
Bears on
- Problem 855: under the prime -tuples conjecture, Table 4 gives for infinitely many , and the 715-point sequence an excess of at least seven at length . With fixed, this contradicts the problem's inequality only if its threshold for "large" is below these lengths; it is a conditional violation at fixed lengths, not an asymptotic counterexample.