Let A be all integers in [M,N] whose prime-power divisors are
at most S and which satisfy
Ω(n)≤5ℓ, Ω(n)≤10ℓ.
Here Ω counts prime factors with multiplicity and
Ω is the maximum exponent. Let
QA={q:q is a prime power dividing some n∈A},Q=lcm(A)=lcm(QA).
Choose probabilities 1/ℓ≤pn≤1/2 for n∈A.
If 1≤x≤Q is an integer and
∑n∈Apn/n=x/Q, the independently sampled subset B obeys
P(n∈B∑n1=x/Q)≥4Q1.(3)
Source and precise scope. This reconstructs the method of
Liu–Sawhney, arXiv:2404.07113v1,
Proposition 3.2, pp. 9–12, in a sufficient range for
Theorem 1.2.
The printed period has a
counterexample.
The proof here uses the actual period and the stronger sixth power in
(2), supplies the carrier step, and makes the residue and cyclic-counting
conventions explicit. It does not prove the statement as printed or its
whole fifth-power parameter range. These are compilation corrections,
not claims about the uninspected published version.
The density input is
Lemma 3.3,
and the local Fourier inputs are
Fact 2.5 and
Lemma 3.1.
The external probability input is
Azuma–Hoeffding.
The prime number theorem π(X)∼X/logX and the prime-power
product estimate at
Theorem 2.1 are external.
One bounded-scale choice also uses external Bertrand's postulate:
for every integer m≥1 there is a prime in (m,2m].
Write R(B)=∑n∈B1/n, e(t)=exp(2πit), and
Ad={n∈A:d∣n} for every positive integer d.
For a finite set D of positive integers, write [D] for its least
common multiple, with [∅]=1.
Density, orthogonality, and the major arc
Lemma 3.3 applies because S≤K<N/2, and gives ∣A∣≥.89N.
Consequently Q≥maxA≥.89N>M≥K. Also, by the external
prime-power product estimate,
Q≤q≤S∏q≤e5S(4)
for large N. The product ranges over all prime powers.
Every n∈A divides Q, so finite cyclic orthogonality gives
All frequencies are integers in the stated half-open interval.
The major arc ∣h∣≤M/2 lies inside it. Since M≥N.9999,
∣A∣≥.89N≥N.95, and
[1/ℓ,1/2]⊆[L−2,1−L−2] eventually,
Lemma 3.1 gives a contribution at least 3/(4Q).
To recover equality from the integer-congruence event in (5), reveal
the Bernoulli indicators one at a time. The centered increments are
bounded by 1/n, so their squared bounds sum to at most N/M2.
Azuma–Hoeffding gives
P(∣R(B)−x/Q∣≥1)≤2exp(−M2/(2N))≤e−6S<4Q1(6)
for large N, using (2), C≥14, and (4). Every nonzero integer
difference is in this tail. It remains to show that the normalized
minor-arc absolute contribution in (5) is at most 1/(4Q).
Residues and minor-arc decay
For each n, let hn be the unique representative of h(modn)
in (−n/2,n/2]. Put
Thus Tq is a set, and ∣Aq∖Tq∣<t for q∈Dh.
Equality at K/2 belongs to the bad set. These definitions repair
the missing absolute value on p. 10 and the set/cardinality mismatch
in the p. 11 display.
Let W(h)=∏n∈A∣1−pn+pne(h/n)∣.
Each factor is in [0,1], and every n has exactly
Ω(n)≤10ℓ prime-power divisors. Hence
W(h)10ℓ≤q∈QA∏n∈Aq∏∣1−pn+pne(h/n)∣.
For ∣hn∣≥K/2, Fact 2.5 and pn≤1/2 imply
∣1−pn+pne(h/n)∣≤exp(−pnK2/N2)≤exp(−K2/(N2ℓ)).
Every q∈/Dh has at least t such factors. Taking the
10ℓ-th root proves
W(h)≤N−10∣QA∖Dh∣.(8)
Averaging and the stronger parameter condition
Fix q∈Dh. For any collection of candidate primes p′,
p′∑∣Aqp′∖Tq∣≤n∈Aq∖Tq∑Ω(n)<10ℓt.(9)
Use the cutoff
Z=106tℓ4/L=108N2ℓ6/K2.
Uniformly under (1),
1022L2ℓ6≤Z≤108L20ℓ6,logZ≤21ℓ
eventually. PNT therefore gives
π(Z)≥2logZZ≥42106Ltℓ3>20000Ltℓ3.
After excluding the one prime underlying q, (9) supplies p′≤Z
with (p′,q)=1 and
∣Aqp′∖Tq∣≤1000ℓ2L.(10)
By (2), choosing C≥108 ensures
qp′≤SZ≤108SN2ℓ6/K2≤K.(11)
This explains the sixth power in (2). To infer (10) from (9) needs
order tℓ3/L prime candidates. The source's preliminary
tℓ2/L cutoff, and its later 106tℓ3/L cutoff on p. 11,
do not give this many: the latter has logarithm of order ℓ and
only order tℓ2/L primes. The fourth-power cutoff above supplies
the required additional factor.
A divisor between 2K and 100K
Bertrand's postulate implies that, for every real v≥1, a prime
lies in (v,2v]. For 1≤v<2 use 2. Otherwise apply the integer
statement to ⌊v⌋: the resulting prime exceeds v and
is at most 2v.
Put a=K/(qp′)≥1. We construct r, a product of one or two
distinct primes at most S, coprime to qp′, such that
2K≤qp′r≤100K.(12)
If S≥100a, three disjoint dyadic intervals starting at 2a
provide three distinct primes in (2a,16a]. At most two divide
qp′, so one is a legal r and is at most S.
If S<100a, PNT supplies a prime r1∈[S/2,S] avoiding those
two divisors. Then qp′r1<100K. If it is at least 2K, use
r=r1. Otherwise set a2=K/(qp′r1)>1/2. Four disjoint dyadic
intervals starting at 2a2>1 provide four primes in (2a2,32a2].
At most three divide qp′r1, so choose a remaining prime r2.
It satisfies
r2≤32a2≤64K/S<S
for large N, since S≥N.9999 and K≤N.
Now r=r1r2 gives (12), with upper bound 32K.
This verifies the bounded real endpoints as well as the distinctness
of the prime factors.
Common primes and nonempty admissible fibers
Let P be the primes in [20L,40L]. PNT gives
∣P∣≥10L/ℓ eventually. Define
Pq={p∈P:(p,qp′r)=1,Aqp′rp⊆Tq}.
By (10), at most L/(1000ℓ2) bad denominators lie in Aqp′r.
Each excludes at most 10ℓ primes from Pq, and at
most four additional primes divide qp′r. Thus
∣Pq∣≥∣P∣−L/(100ℓ)−4≥.9∣P∣.(13)
For p∈Pq, put b=qp′rp. The assertion
Ab⊆Tq is useful only after showing Ab nonempty.
By (1) and (12),
40KL≤b≤4000KL≤N/2000,2000≤N/b≤L9/40.
There are at most five distinct prime divisors of b. The prime
exponent in q is at most 5ℓ, since q divides an actual
member of A. All other factors p′, the primes in r, and p
are distinct and avoid it. Hence
Ω(b)≤5ℓ and Ω(b)≤5ℓ+4.
Every prime-power divisor of b is at most S: this holds for q
by definition, for the factors in r by construction, and for
p′≤Z and p≤40L because both upper bounds are smaller than
S≥N.9999 eventually.
The
carrier lemma therefore supplies n∈Ab∩[N/2,N].
This justifies the implicit multiple-selection step on source p. 12,
including both exponent restrictions.
Since n∈Tq, h−hn is a multiple of n in Ih.
The interval has length K, whereas qp′r≥2K, so it contains at
most one multiple of qp′r. All choices p∈Pq yield
the same integer xq∈Ih, and every such p divides xq.
One common multiple and the cyclic count
For q1,q2∈Dh, (13) gives
$|\mathcal P_{q_1}\cap\mathcal P_{q_2}|\ge.8|\mathcal P|
\ge8L/\ell$. The product of these distinct primes is at least
(20L)8L/ℓ>N. It divides xq1−xq2, whose absolute
value is less than K≤N. Therefore all xq are equal, and
[Dh] divides their common value in Ih. If Dh is empty, use
the integer h∈Ih and [Dh]=1 instead.
For a minor-arc frequency ∣h∣>M/2, we cannot have
Dh=QA. Otherwise a multiple of Q would lie within
distance K/2 of h∈(−Q/2,Q/2]. Since Q>K, the only possible
multiple is zero, which ∣h∣>M/2≥K/2 excludes.
Fix D⊆QA and count residues cyclically modulo
Q. Since [D]∣Q, wrapping preserves divisibility by [D].
There are Q/[D] multiples in the cycle. Each has at most K+1
integer-frequency residues at distance less than K/2, so
#{h:Dh=D}≤(K+1)Q/[D].
If s=∣QA∖D∣, then
Q/[D]≤∏q∈/Dq≤Ns and K+1≤N.
There are at most Ns missing sets of size s. Using (8), the
normalized total absolute minor-arc contribution is at most
Q1s≥1∑Ns+1NsN−10s≤QN2≤4Q1
for sufficiently large N. Adding the major arc proves that (5) is
at least 1/(2Q). Subtracting (6) proves (3).
Limits of the statement
All thresholds are sufficiently-large thresholds, with no explicit
finite N0 certified here. The actual-period, sixth-power form is
enough for the source's counting choices. Other applications of the
printed Proposition 3.2, including the later denominator theorems,
require their own parameter and target checks.