Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Proposition 1, p. 4, 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 number of divisors of with .
Proposition 1 (p. 4, quoted). "Let be a fixed integer, and let and be fixed real numbers. Then
The right side does not involve . The printed statement fixes and does not name the dependence of the implied constant. The proof (p. 4) ends with the alternative or for the number of divisors in the window, with no dependence on , so the bound holds uniformly in (a reading of the proof by this page).
The paper states it in Section 4 as one of three statements used for Theorem 1. On p. 2 it refers to Proposition 1 when it says that a relaxed version of Conjecture 2 would ask for a larger region in which ; in Theorem 1's notation the proposition covers windows of length with , inside the region where .
Read depth. Claims checked: the statement was read clause by clause on the printed page, and the short proof was read. Not independently reviewed.
Proof pointer
Page 4. Take divisors of in the window. Their least common multiple is at most , each pairwise greatest common divisor is at most the gap , and each . Lemma 1 (p. 2) with , , then gives, on comparing exponents of , , which forces one of the two bounds on above.
Dependencies
Lemma 1 (p. 2): for positive integers and every integer , , where is the least common multiple and the greatest common divisor. The paper takes it from H. Cohen, Diviseurs appartenant à une même classe résiduelle, Seminar on number theory 1982-83, Université de Bordeaux I, Exp. No. 16, Corollaire 1.4.
Bears on
- Problem 886: at the proposition gives, for each fixed , at most divisors of in , for every . This answers the problem's question for each with ; for the window has length at most . The problem page records that Erdős and Rosenfeld's bound already answers the question for every . The range would need windows of length with , outside the proposition's hypothesis.
- Problem 887: the problem's windows have length , longer than the the proposition allows at , so it settles no instance.
- Problem 873: the paper does not mention this problem. A note posted in the problem's thread (claim page) combines this proposition with packing lemmas of its own in an argument that it says answers the question for every exponent above ; that reduction is the note's, not the paper's, and is not checked here.