Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated


Claim. With pnp_n the least prime ≡1(modn)\equiv1\pmod n and mnm_n the least integer with n∣φ(mn)n\mid\varphi(m_n) (so mn≤pnm_n\le p_n always), David Turturean, A positive-density equality set in Erdős Problem 456, and a Dickson-conditional family of uniqueness primes, a 71-page manuscript posted to the problem's thread on 4 May 2026 and digested on its card, proves in its Theorem 1.1 that #{n≤x:mn=pn}≥cx\#\{n\le x:m_n=p_n\}\ge cx for some c>0c>0 and all large xx. Its Corollary 1.2 deduces that the first two questions of Problem 456 have the answer no: mn<pnm_n<p_n fails on a positive proportion of nn, and pn/mnp_n/m_n, equal to 11 there, does not tend to infinity for almost all nn. The proof counts base triples (b,s,P)(b,s,P) with n=sPn=sP, p=bsP+1p=bsP+1 prime and P2>pP^2>p, so that any smaller totient cover of nn would contain a prime aP+1aP+1 (its Definition 4.1). The author writes that the proof was produced by an automated audit-and-revise scaffold the author designed, querying GPT-5.5-Pro, and that the author verified the final proof.

Covers. The first two questions, both answered no. Not covered: the third question, which the manuscript answers only under Dickson's conjecture for the triple t,2t+1,8t+1t,2t+1,8t+1 (its Theorem 1.4), a conditional result that settles no instance; the unconditional third answer is the claim of 2026-09-23.

Formalization. The repository linked above, at its head commit of 2 September 2026, formalizes this manuscript. By its README, the first two answers (erdos_456_questions_one_two) rest on ten cited literature results stated as axioms, and the third question is proved only under the Dickson-triple hypothesis (erdos_456_question_three_of_dickson). No build, axiom audit or statement audit of the repository was made in this corpus.

Depends on. Nothing in this wiki.

Standing. A manuscript statement, pending: the site's label is OPEN (page last edited 7 October 2025), no referee report or arXiv record exists, and no outside reviewer has accepted the argument. The card's digest is author-recorded and is not an acceptance.