../
Source. Terence Tao, The convergence of an alternating series of Erdős,
assuming the Hardy--Littlewood prime tuples conjecture, the random sifted
model and displays (3.7)--(3.8) on physical and printed pp. 7--8, and
Lemma 3.2 with its proof on pp. 9--10, in the sixteen-page arXiv v3 PDF
held by its library card,
Tao (2023).
Standing. This is an author-recorded reconstruction of a source lemma
and of the model it concerns. It is not an independent review, changes no
status and assigns no tier. The lemma is unconditional. Two external inputs
are imported without rereading their proofs: Mertens' theorems and the pair
singular-series average, both stated precisely below.
Definitions
Throughout, p ranges over primes. For a finite set
H={h1,…,hk} of distinct integers, νH(p)
is the number of residue classes modulo p occupied by H, and
S(H)=p∏(1−1/p)k1−νH(p)/p
is its singular series; the product converges absolutely because
νH(p)=k once p exceeds every difference ∣hi−hj∣, and
then the factor is 1+O(k2/p2). If some p has νH(p)=p
then S(H)=0.
Fix a positive integer d (in the main argument d=λlogx) and a
real z≥d. Choose, for each prime p≤z, a residue class
apmodp uniformly at random, independently over p. For real
w≤z the random sifted set at level w is
Sw={0<h≤d: h≡ap (modp) for all p≤w},Sw=∣Sw∣.
The source writes λlogx for d; the model is that of Banks, Ford
and Tao (the source's reference [1], §1.3), which this repository does not
hold.
Imported input 1 (Mertens' theorems). There is an absolute constant
B such that, for y≥2,
p≤y∑p1=loglogy+B+O(logy1),p≤y∏(1−p1)=logye−γ(1+O(logy1)),
where γ is the Euler--Mascheroni constant. These are the standard
forms of Mertens' second and third theorems, and are used as external
theorems here; the repository holds no source for them.
Imported input 2 (pair singular-series average). For all sufficiently
large integers H,
20<h1<h2≤H∑S({h1,h2})≤H2.
This is the source's display (3.14) on p. 9. The source attributes the
asymptotic H2−HlogH+O(H) for the left side to unpublished work of
Montgomery, with a full proof in M. J. Croft, Square-free numbers in
arithmetic progressions, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 30 (1975), 143--159
(the source's reference [2]), and cites the sharper asymptotic of Montgomery
and Soundararajan, Primes in short intervals, Comm. Math. Phys. 252
(2004), 589--617 (its reference [16], displays (16)--(17)). The asymptotic
implies the inequality for large H because HlogH eventually exceeds
the O(H) term. Neither paper is held or reread here.
Let 0<h1<⋯<hk≤d and d≤w≤z, and write
H={h1,…,hk}. The events
{h1,…,hk≡ap (modp)} for distinct p≤w
are independent, and each has probability 1−νH(p)/p, since
ap is uniform and H occupies νH(p)
classes. Hence
P(h1,…,hk∈Sw)=p≤w∏(1−pνH(p)).
For p>w≥d every difference hj−hi lies in (0,d), so is not
divisible by p, and νH(p)=k. Multiplying and dividing by
the absolutely convergent product over p>w gives display (3.7):
P(h1,…,hk∈Sw)=S(H)(p≤w∏(1−p1)k)p>w∏1−k/p(1−1/p)k.
If S(H)=0 both sides vanish, since the vanishing
factor 1−νH(p)/p then occurs at some p≤w.
Now suppose k2≤w; then k/p≤1/2 for every p>w (for k≥2
because k≤w/k≤w/2, and trivially for k=1). For 0≤u≤1/2
one has ∣log(1−u)+u∣≤u2, so for p>w
klog(1−p1)−log(1−pk)=k(−p1+O(p21))+pk+O(p2k2)=O(p2k2).
Summing over p>w and using ∑n>wn−2≤1/⌊w⌋≤2/w
for real w≥1 gives
∑p>w(klog(1−1/p)−log(1−k/p))=O(k2/w), and since
k2/w≤1, exponentiating gives display (3.8):
P(h1,…,hk∈Sw)=S(H)(p≤w∏(1−p1)k)(1+O(wk2))(k2≤w).
The source states (3.8) in the regime k≤r of its fixed setting
(p. 7), where k2/w→0; the hypothesis k2≤w is supplied here as
the one the derivation uses, since under 2k≤w alone k2/w is
unbounded and exp(O(k2/w)) is not 1+O(k2/w). In the main argument
k≤r≪(loglogx)4.5 and w≥d≥logx, so k2≤w holds
for large x.
Statement
Lemma 3.2. There is an absolute constant d0 such that for every
integer d≥d0, every real z≥d and every real w with
d≤w≤z,
ESw=dp≤w∏(1−p1)=eγlogwd(1+O(logw1))(3.12)
and
Var(Sw)≪logwd.(3.13)
The implied constants are absolute, the source's convention for O and
≪ (p. 3). The source states the lemma for λlogx≤w≤z
with d=λlogx inside its fixed setting, where x is sufficiently
large and λlogx is an integer with 1≪λ (pp. 5--6); the
hypothesis d≥d0 replaces that setting here and is used twice below,
as d≥4 where (3.8) is applied with k=2 and as d at least the
threshold of imported input 2.
Proof
Mean. By linearity of expectation and the case k=1 of the product
formula, for which ν{h}(p)=1 for every p,
ESw=0<h≤d∑P(h∈Sw)=dp≤w∏(1−p1),
and Mertens' third theorem gives the second form of (3.12). The source
writes this probability "for all 0<h≤w"; the sum runs over
0<h≤d, and d≤w, so nothing changes.
Second factorial moment. The number of two-element subsets of
Sw is (2Sw), so
E(Sw2−Sw)=2E(2Sw)=20<h1<h2≤d∑P(h1,h2∈Sw).
By (3.8) with k=2 (valid as w≥d≥4, so that k2=4≤w, which
d≥d0 supplies),
P(h1,h2∈Sw)=S({h1,h2})Pw2(1+O(w1)),Pw:=p≤w∏(1−p1).
Imported input 2 with H=d, which d≥d0 allows, gives
2∑0<h1<h2≤dS({h1,h2})≤d2, hence
E(Sw2−Sw)≤d2Pw2+O(wd2Pw2).
Variance. Since ESw=dPw,
Var(Sw)=E(Sw2−Sw)+ESw−(dPw)2≤ESw+O(wd2Pw2).
By (3.12), ESw≪d/logw. By the hypothesis
w≥d and Mertens' third theorem, d2Pw2/w≤dPw2≪d/log2w.
Both terms are ≪d/logw, which is (3.13).
Boundary. The lemma is unconditional. Its only inputs beyond the model
are Mertens' theorems and the pair singular-series average, both imported.
The
Theorem 1.4 reconstruction
consumes (3.7)--(3.8) at level w=z and (3.12)--(3.13) at every prime
level w in [d,z].