Source. Scott D. Hughes, Sums of distinct divisors of factorials,
arXiv:2609.10902v1, Theorem 1 (physical p. 1) and its proof in Section 3
(pp. 2–4), in the five-page PDF held by
Hughes (2026);
the library records the theorem on
its result page.
Read in the canonical conversion beside the PDF and checked against the page
images (pp. 1–4). The two ingredients are reconstructed on
the Lemma 4 page and
the Corollary 3 page.
Standing. Author-recorded reconstruction; not an independent review; it
changes no status and assigns no tier. The argument imports the
Berend–Harmse gap estimate through Corollary 3 (second-hand; see that page)
and the elementary asymptotic ∑j≤n1/logj∼n/logn. As a
bound on h(n!) the theorem is superseded by the site-accepted
h(n!)<no(1) recorded on
the Problem 18 page; its interest is the explicit
constant of the greedy route.
Definitions
An integer N≥1 is practical if every integer 1≤m≤N is a sum of
distinct divisors of N; for practical N, h(N) is the least k such
that every 1≤m≤N is a sum of at most k distinct divisors of N (a
fresh set of divisors for each m). Greedy expansion, bracketing divisors,
chosen divisors and nonterminal steps are defined on
the Lemma 4 page;
εj and the windows [(j−1)!,j!] on
the Corollary 3 page.
Throughout, N=n!,
j0=216,T0=2(j0+1)!,ℓ(R)=logR,
and for integers j≥j0+1
δj=6εj−1,sj=logδj1=logεj−11−log6.
By display (1) of the Corollary 3 page applied at j−1, and since
log(j−1)=logj+O(1/j),
sj=2log2(logj)2(1+O(logjloglogj)).(2)
The sequence sj is increasing in j, because εj−1 is
decreasing, and sj≥64log2−log6>0 for every j≥j0+1.
For real 1≤R≤N let j(R) be the least integer j∈[j0+1,n]
with R≤j!; it exists because n!=N, and it is
nondecreasing in R. If R≥T0 then R>(j0+1)!, so
j(R)≥j0+2, and by minimality (j(R)−1)!<R≤j(R)!.
Statement
h(n!)≤(2log2+o(1))lognn(n→∞).
Proof
Since the statement is asymptotic, assume n≥j02; then T0<N.
Fix 1≤m≤N and run the greedy expansion R0=m>R1>⋯ of Lemma 4.
Consecutive divisors of N=n! have ratio at most 2 (proved on the Lemma
4 page), so Lemma 4 applies at every nonterminal step: the divisors used are
distinct and m is their sum. The number of divisors used is the number of
nonterminal steps plus one. The nonterminal steps are counted by the size of
the remainder Ri at which they start, in four ranges: N/T0<R≤N,
N<R≤N/T0, T0≤R≤N and 1≤R<T0. Since the
remainders decrease, the steps of each range form a consecutive run.
Locating the window of a step
Let d<R<b be the bracketing divisors of a nonterminal remainder R. Two
symmetric facts hold.
(i) If R≤N then db≤N. Otherwise N/d<b; but N/d is a
divisor of N with N/d≥N/R≥N≥R>d, so N/d would be a
divisor of N strictly between the consecutive divisors d and b.
(ii) If R>N then db≥N. Otherwise N/b>d; but
N/b<N/R<N<R<b, so N/b would be a divisor of N strictly between
d and b.
Also d≥b/2>R/2 and b≤2d<2R, so R2/2<db<2R2 and
R/2<db<2R.
The window bound
Let T0≤R≤N be a nonterminal remainder with bracketing divisors
d<R<b, and put j=j(R), so that (j−1)!<R≤j! and
j≥j0+2. Then
db>2R>2(j−1)!≥(j−2)!,db<2R≤2j!≤(j+1)!,
using j−1≥2 and j+1≥2; and db≤N by
(i). Hence db lies in the window [(j′−1)!,j′!] of
some index j′∈{j−1,j,j+1} with j′≤n (the value N itself
belongs to the window of index n). As j′≥j−1≥j0+1>216 and
n≥j′, Corollary 3 gives
log(b/d)≤3εj′≤3εj−1 by the monotonicity of
ε. That is,
logdb≤21δj(R).(3)
Lower range T0≤R≤N
For a nonterminal step starting at Ri in this range, Lemma 4 and (3) give
Ri+1≤2Rilog(b/d)≤Riδj(Ri), that is,
ℓ(Ri+1)≤ℓ(Ri)−sj(Ri).(4)
For ℓ in the interval [ℓ(Ri+1),ℓ(Ri)] one has eℓ≤Ri,
hence j(eℓ)≤j(Ri) and sj(eℓ)≤sj(Ri). Therefore, by
(4),
The intervals [ℓ(Ri+1),ℓ(Ri)] of the steps starting in the lower
range have disjoint interiors and lie inside [logT0,21logN],
except that the last of them may extend below logT0. Hence the number
of such steps is at most
1+∫logT021logNsj(eℓ)dℓ.
The set of ℓ with j(eℓ)=j is contained in
(21log(j−1)!,21logj!], an interval of length
21logj, and there the integrand is 1/sj. So
#{steps with T0≤R≤N}≤1+j=j0+1∑nsj21logj=1+j=j0+1∑n(logjlog2+O((logj)2loglogj)),
by (2), since 21logj⋅2log2/(logj)2=log2/logj and
(1/logj)⋅loglogj/logj=loglogj/(logj)2. The elementary
asymptotic
2≤j≤n∑logj1=lognn(1+O(logn1)),
obtained by comparing the sum with ∫2ndt/logt and integrating by
parts once, and the crude bound
∑j≤nloglogj/(logj)2≪nloglogn/(logn)2 (split the sum
at n), give
#{steps with T0≤R≤N}≤(log2+O(lognloglogn))lognn.
Upper range N<R≤N/T0
Put U=N/R, so T0≤U<N. If d<R<b are the bracketing divisors of
R, then N/b<U<N/d, and N/b, N/d are consecutive divisors of N,
because x↦N/x is an order-reversing bijection of the divisor set;
their ratio is again b/d, and their geometric mean N/db satisfies
U/2<N/db<2U by the bounds on db above and
N/db≤N by (ii). So the argument that proved (3) applies
word for word to the pair N/b<U<N/d in place of d<R<b: with
j=j(U)≥j0+2, the geometric mean lies in a window of index
j′∈{j−1,j,j+1}, j′≤n, and Corollary 3 gives
log(b/d)≤21δj(U). Lemma 4, applied to the actual remainder
R with its bracketing divisors d<R<b, then gives
Ri+1≤δj(Ui)Ri; with Ui=N/Ri this reads
logUi+1−logUi≥sj(Ui).(5)
Along the expansion Ui increases, so j(Ui) and sj(Ui) are
nondecreasing in i. The charging integral of the lower range cannot be
mirrored: there the descent of a step was bounded below by the value of s
at the upper end of the step's interval, which dominated the integrand
on the whole interval, whereas (5) bounds the ascent of a step by the value
of s at the lower end, which does not. The steps are counted in dyadic
blocks of window indices instead.
Then 2Rn≤n/(2j0)<2Rn+1 gives j0≤JRn<2j0, and the
blocks B0,…,BRn partition the integers in
(JRn,n].
Steps starting in a block. Fix r and consider the nonterminal steps of
the upper range whose start satisfies j(Ui)∈Br; they form a
consecutive run of the expansion because j(Ui) is nondecreasing in i.
For each of them (j(Ui)−1)!<Ui≤j(Ui)!, so their values
logUi lie in an interval of length at most
Lr=21Jr<j≤2Jr∑logj=21JrlogJr+O(Jr),
the last by comparing the sum with
∫Jr2Jrlogtdt=2Jrlog(2Jr)−JrlogJr−Jr. By (5) and the
monotonicity of s, consecutive starts of the run are separated in logU
by at least s⌊Jr⌋+1, because j(Ui)>Jr forces
j(Ui)≥⌊Jr⌋+1. A run of M starts therefore has
(M−1)s⌊Jr⌋+1≤Lr, so the run has at most
steps, by (2) at ⌊Jr⌋+1, where
log(⌊Jr⌋+1)=logJr+O(1/Jr), and
21JrlogJr⋅2log2/(logJr)2=log2⋅Jr/logJr; the
term O(Jr)/s⌊Jr⌋+1 is O(Jr/(logJr)2) and is
absorbed.
Steps below the blocks. The remaining upper-range steps have
j(Ui)≤JRn<2j0, hence T0≤Ui≤(2j0)!. By (5) each of
them raises logU by at least sj0+2>0, an absolute constant, inside
the fixed interval [logT0,21log(2j0)!]; so there are O(1) of
them.
Summing the blocks. The main terms satisfy
∑r=0RnJr/logJr≤(1+o(1))n/logn: for fixed 0<η<1,
the blocks with Jr≥n1−η have logJr≥(1−η)logn and
∑rJr≤n, so they contribute at most n/((1−η)logn), while the
blocks with Jr<n1−η contribute at most
∑Jr<n1−ηJr≤2n1−η=o(n/logn); letting n→∞
and then η→0 gives the claim. The relative-error terms satisfy
the function g(t)=loglogt/(logt)2 is decreasing for t≥j0 (its
derivative has the sign of 1−2loglogt), so the blocks with
Jr≥n have g(Jr)≤g(n)≤4loglogn/(logn)2 and
∑rJr≤n, and the blocks with Jr<n have g(Jr)≤g(j0)
and ∑Jr≤2n. The O(1) terms of the Rn+1=O(logn) blocks
total O(logn). Altogether
#{steps with N<R≤N/T0}≤(log2+o(1))lognn.
Endgames
For a nonterminal step starting at Ri>N/T0: since di>Ri/2,
Ri+1=Ri−di<Ri/2. If the first M steps all start above N/T0,
then N/T0<RM−1<R0/2M−1≤N/2M−1, so M<log2T0+1: at most
O(1) steps. The same halving bounds the number of steps starting at
1≤R<T0 by log2T0+1.
uniformly in 1≤m≤N, which is the theorem. The source's Remark 5 (p.
4) records that the o(1) is O(loglogn/logn), inherited from the
lg(lgn) term of the gap estimate.
Gaps and qualifications
The gap estimate is imported second-hand through Corollary 3; the 1993
paper is not held.
The source writes j(R)−1≥j0 "by the choice of T0"; in fact
R≥T0 forces j(R)≥j0+2, which is what the window bound uses.
The asymptotic ∑j≤n1/logj∼n/logn and the block sum
∑rJr/logJr≤(1+o(1))n/logn are stated by the source without
proof; the justifications above are supplied by the compilation.
The source counts the steps of the lower range from j=j0+1; the window
of index j0+1 lies below logT0 and contributes nothing, so this is
only an upper bound, as used.