Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Claim. On 2026-06-21 Kenta Kitamura (forum name KentaKitamura) posted in
the thread of Problem 346 a Lean 4
development for the reading of the question in which the limit of
is assumed to exist. Its theorems main_expanded and
main_valueDeletion_expanded state: if is a strictly
increasing sequence of positive integers such that minus any finite set of
terms is complete, minus any infinite set of terms is not complete,
for some and all , and
for some , then .
The two versions delete indices and values respectively, and the repository
proves them equivalent for strictly increasing sequences. Its README reports
that #print axioms lists only propext, Classical.choice and
Quot.sound for both theorems, with no sorryAx; the post discloses that
the formalization and its write-up were prepared with assistance from Codex and
ChatGPT.
Covers. Sequences satisfying the problem's hypotheses whose consecutive ratios converge: for them the limit is , as the question asks. It settles nothing for sequences whose ratios do not converge, where Price's counterexample shows that the hypotheses do not force convergence; so the Statement, with convergence part of the conclusion, is disproved, while for the variant in which the limit is assumed to exist this development claims the answer yes.
Standing. Claimed. Nat Sothanaphan wrote in the thread on 2026-06-21 that
the Lean proof correctly shows that a limit is impossible, that
the case is also handled by Burr and Erdős (1981), and gave an
informal argument for the remaining case , crediting GPT-5.5
Thinking for the check and discussion. The site's curator labels Problem 346
solved and credits Price's counterexample; the label does not credit this
result, so the thread check is recorded here in prose and no reviewed
evidence is listed. Nothing was built or audited here, so no formalized
evidence is listed.
Depends on. Nothing in this wiki.