Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Conjecture 1, p. 1, of Patrick Letendre, Divisors of an Integer in a Short Interval, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.12146v1 (15 March 2025), the version named on the source card.
Statement
Setting (p. 1). is the set of the divisors of , and
the number of divisors of in the closed interval .
Conjecture 1 (p. 1, quoted). "Let be fixed. There exists a constant such that, for each integer , we have ."
The paper presents it as suggested in the literature and cites Erdős and Rosenfeld (Acta Arith. 79 (1997)) and two papers of T. H. Chan (Acta Arith. 163 (2014); Int. J. Number Theory 11 (2015)). For it is the case of the paper's own Conjecture 2 (p. 1), which asks, for each fixed and , for a constant with $D_n(n^\theta,n^{\theta-\epsilon})\le k_\epsilon(\theta)$ for each integer .
What the paper proves about it. Proposition 1 (p. 4) at , with the uniformity in that its proof gives, yields the cases (Proposition 1; a specialization by this page, not a claim of the paper). For the window has length at most and holds at most two divisors. Theorem 2 (p. 2) at shows that constants as in Conjecture 2 must satisfy (Theorem 2). Section 6 (pp. 12-14) discusses a method for windows near without proving the conjecture. The case is left open.
Read depth. Claims checked: the statement and its setting were read on the printed page. Not independently reviewed.
Bears on
- Problem 886: the problem asks whether, for each , every large has divisors in the open interval . That count and differ by at most , and each of the finitely many small has finitely many divisors, so Conjecture 1 and a yes answer to Problem 886 are equivalent (an observation of this page, not of the paper). The paper does not prove the conjecture.
- Problem 887: the problem asks for an absolute such that, for every , every large has at most divisors in . For any one fixed with , once is large, so Conjecture 1 for that would give (an observation of this page, not of the paper). The conjecture is unproved in that range.