Source. Liu--Sawhney, On further questions regarding unit fractions,
arXiv:2404.07113v1, Lemma 3.1, p. 9; see the
source digest.
Statement. Let N be sufficiently large,
N0.95≤M≤N, and A⊆[M,N]∩Z with
∣A∣≥N0.95. For each n∈A, let
(logN)−2≤pn≤1−(logN)−2.
Let Q>0 and choose x so that
x/Q=∑n∈Apn/n. With e(t)=exp(2πit) and the sum over
integer frequencies h,
Q1∣h∣≤M/2∑Re(e(−hx/Q)n∈A∏(1−pn+pne(h/n)))≥4Q3.
In the later applications Q is a positive integer common denominator
and x is an integer. This lemma's proof requires only Q>0 and the
displayed relation between x/Q and the probabilities.
Proof. Write
F(h)=e(−hx/Q)n∈A∏(1−pn+pne(h/n)),H=M3/5.
First consider ∣h∣≤H. The Taylor estimate in
Fact 2.5
gives, uniformly in n∈A,
1−pn+pne(h/n)=e(pnh/n)exp(−n22π2pn(1−pn)h2)(1+O(n3∣h∣3)).
The conversion of the quadratic polynomial to an exponential introduces
an error O(h4/n4), which is absorbed by O(∣h∣3/n3) because
∣h∣/n≤M−2/5. The phase factors cancel exactly:
e(−hx/Q)n∈A∏e(pnh/n)=1.
Moreover,
n∈A∑n3∣h∣3≤H3n≥⌈M⌉∑n31≪M9/5M−2=M−1/5.
Multiplying the error factors therefore yields
F(h)=(1+O(M−1/5))exp(−n∈A∑n22π2pn(1−pn)h2),
where the error may be complex. For large N its real part is at least
−1/6, and the exponential is positive. Hence
Q1∣h∣≤H∑ReF(h)≥6Q5∣h∣≤H∑exp(−n∈A∑n22π2pn(1−pn)h2)≥6Q5,
using just the term h=0 for the last inequality.
For the remaining frequencies H<∣h∣≤M/2, we have
∣h∣/n≤1/2. The absolute-value bound in Fact 2.5 gives
∣F(h)∣≤n∈A∏(1−n28pn(1−pn)h2)≤exp(−8h2n∈A∑n2pn(1−pn)).
Put δ=(logN)−2. For large N,
pn(1−pn)≥δ(1−δ)≥δ/2. Since
n≤N, ∣A∣≥N0.95, and M≥N0.95,
∣F(h)∣≤exp(−N24δ∣A∣M6/5)≤exp(−(logN)24N0.09).
There are at most M+1≤N+1 integer frequencies in this range.
Their total absolute contribution is consequently o(1/Q), and for
large N is at most 1/(12Q). Combining the two ranges gives
5/(6Q)−1/(12Q)=3/(4Q), as claimed.
Source formula corrections. The source propagates Fact 2.5's
2π coefficient typo; the proof above uses 2π2, as required by
the displayed Taylor expansion. Its first proof display also uses
exp(pnh/n) where the cancellation requires the phase e(pnh/n).
The final tail estimate here retains the factor 1/Q, making its
comparison with the major-arc lower bound explicit. These are local
formula clarifications; the argument and constants in the conclusion
are those of the source.
Dependencies.
Fact 2.5,
the summability of n−3, and elementary exponential estimates.
Bears on. #298 and
#299, through the major-arc part of the
quantitative reciprocal-sum criterion.