Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated

../


Source. Rafik Zeraoulia, Fixed-Scale Limit Points for the Counting Function of Distinct Euler Totients, preprint, July 2026, in the fifteen-page PDF held by its library source card, Zeraoulia (2026): Theorem 1.1 (physical p. 2), proved through Lemma 2.1 and Theorem 2.2 (§2, p. 3), Lemma 3.1, Proposition 3.2, Theorems 3.3 and 3.4 and Corollary 3.5 (§3, pp. 4–5), with Proposition 6.1 (p. 8) added for its bearing on c=2c=2. Physical and numbered pages coincide. Pages 2–5 and 8 were read against the page images; the rest of the preprint (the matched quotient of §4, the block-energy identity and second-moment criterion of §5, the entropy recursion of §6, the log-periodic model of §7 and the computation of §8) was read in text extraction only and is not reconstructed here.

Standing. This is an author-recorded reconstruction of the unconditional part of a self-published, unreviewed preprint. It is not an independent review, changes no status of Problem 416 and assigns no tier. The only external inputs are Ford's Theorem 1 and Chebyshev's bound, stated below in the versions used. The preprint itself says (Remark 3.6) that nothing here controls the width of the cluster interval; for c=2c=2 the accepted Lean proof recorded on the problem page collapses the interval to the point 22, and for c≠2c\ne2 the limit V(cx)/V(x)→cV(cx)/V(x)\to c remains open.

Definitions and imported inputs

For real xx let T(x)T(x) be the set of integers nn with 1≤n≤x1\le n\le x and n=φ(m)n=\varphi(m) for some integer m≥1m\ge1, and V(x)=∣T(x)∣V(x)=|T(x)|. Fix a real c>1c>1 and put Rc(x)=V(cx)/V(x)R_c(x)=V(cx)/V(x) for real x≥1x\ge1. Write log⁡kx\log_kx for the kk-fold iterated natural logarithm, and π(y)\pi(y) for the number of primes up to yy.

Elementary facts about VV. VV is nondecreasing and integer-valued, so Rc(x)≥1R_c(x)\ge1. For 0≤h≤10\le h\le1 the interval (x,x+h](x,x+h] contains at most one integer and (cx,c(x+h)](cx,c(x+h)] at most ⌈ch⌉≤⌈c⌉\lceil ch\rceil\le\lceil c\rceil integers, so

0≤V(x+h)−V(x)≤1,0≤V(c(x+h))−V(cx)≤⌈c⌉.0\le V(x+h)-V(x)\le1,\qquad 0\le V(c(x+h))-V(cx)\le\lceil c\rceil .

Chebyshev's lower bound. There is an absolute constant c0>0c_0>0 with π(y)≥c0 y/log⁡y\pi(y)\ge c_0\,y/\log y for all real y≥2y\ge2. Since p↦p−1=φ(p)p\mapsto p-1=\varphi(p) injects the primes p≤x+1p\le x+1 into T(x)T(x),

V(x)≥π(x+1)≥c0 xlog⁡x(x≥2).V(x)\ge\pi(x+1)\ge c_0\,\frac{x}{\log x}\qquad(x\ge2).

Ford's Theorem 1. Theorem 1 of Ford (1998) (the held paper's §1.1, stated on its card): there are constants C=0.8178…C=0.8178\ldots and D=2.1769…D=2.1769\ldots such that, for all large xx,

V(x)=xlog⁡xexp⁡{Ψ(x)+O(1)},Ψ(x)=C(log⁡3x−log⁡4x)2+Dlog⁡3x−(D+12−2C)log⁡4x.V(x)=\frac{x}{\log x}\exp\bigl\{\Psi(x)+O(1)\bigr\},\qquad \Psi(x)=C(\log_3x-\log_4x)^2+D\log_3x-\bigl(D+\tfrac12-2C\bigr)\log_4x .

The held Ford PDF is the author's later corrected text, not the 1998 journal print: its Remark after Theorem 3 (p. 3) says that the proof of Theorem 3 in the journal paper, cited there as [14] (p. 42), contains an error and gives a corrected proof with a weaker estimate, and its metadata date is 2012. The preprint's reference [5] is the arXiv revision (arXiv:1104.3264v2, 2013); its display (2) on p. 3 agrees with the statement above, which is the held text's Theorem 1 (p. 2). The 1998 journal print is not held, and whether the held file's bytes coincide with the arXiv posting was not checked. Only the following consequence is used: with M(x)=(x/log⁡x)eΨ(x)M(x)=(x/\log x)e^{\Psi(x)} there are K>0K>0 and x1x_1 such that

V(x)=M(x) eE(x),∣E(x)∣≤K(x≥x1).(F)V(x)=M(x)\,e^{E(x)},\qquad|E(x)|\le K\qquad(x\ge x_1). \tag{F}

The values of CC and DD play no role.

Statement

For every fixed real c>1c>1:

  1. lim inf⁡n→∞∣V(cn)/V(n)−c∣=0\liminf_{n\to\infty}|V(cn)/V(n)-c|=0, the limit inferior taken over the integers nn.
  2. More precisely, for every function L(X)→∞L(X)\to\infty there is a function ω(X)→0\omega(X)\to0, depending on cc and LL, such that for all large XX some integer n∈[X,cXL(X)]n\in[X,cXL(X)] satisfies ∣Rc(n)−c∣≤ω(X)|R_c(n)-c|\le\omega(X).
  3. The set Cc\mathcal C_c of subsequential limits of Rc(n)R_c(n) as n→∞n\to\infty through the integers is the closed interval [αc,βc][\alpha_c,\beta_c] with αc=lim inf⁡nRc(n)\alpha_c=\liminf_nR_c(n) and βc=lim sup⁡nRc(n)\beta_c=\limsup_nR_c(n), and αc≤c≤βc\alpha_c\le c\le\beta_c; the same set is obtained as x→∞x\to\infty through the reals.

Consequently exactly one of the following holds: Rc(x)→cR_c(x)\to c; or Cc\mathcal C_c is a nondegenerate closed interval containing cc, so that RcR_c has continuum many limit points. Nothing below bounds βc−αc\beta_c-\alpha_c.

Proof

Step 1: the logarithmic profile (Lemma 2.1)

For real tt large enough that ct≥x1c^t\ge x_1 and log⁡4(ct)\log_4(c^t) is defined, put u=tlog⁡c=log⁡(ct)u=t\log c=\log(c^t), ψc(t)=Ψ(ct)\psi_c(t)=\Psi(c^t) and

ηc(t)=−log⁡(tlog⁡c)+ψc(t).\eta_c(t)=-\log(t\log c)+\psi_c(t).

Then log⁡M(ct)=log⁡(ct)−log⁡log⁡(ct)+Ψ(ct)=tlog⁡c+ηc(t)\log M(c^t)=\log(c^t)-\log\log(c^t)+\Psi(c^t)=t\log c+\eta_c(t), so (F) reads

log⁡V(ct)=tlog⁡c+ηc(t)+E(ct),∣E(ct)∣≤K.(5)\log V(c^t)=t\log c+\eta_c(t)+E(c^t),\qquad|E(c^t)|\le K . \tag{5}

Now log⁡3(ct)=log⁡log⁡u\log_3(c^t)=\log\log u and log⁡4(ct)=log⁡log⁡log⁡u\log_4(c^t)=\log\log\log u, and du/dt=log⁡cdu/dt=\log c, so

ddtlog⁡3(ct)=log⁡culog⁡u=1tlog⁡u,ddtlog⁡4(ct)=1tlog⁡u log⁡log⁡u.\frac{d}{dt}\log_3(c^t)=\frac{\log c}{u\log u}=\frac{1}{t\log u},\qquad \frac{d}{dt}\log_4(c^t)=\frac{1}{t\log u\,\log\log u}.

For u≥eeu\ge e^e both derivatives lie in (0,1/(tlog⁡u)](0,1/(t\log u)] and 0≤log⁡4(ct)≤log⁡3(ct)=log⁡log⁡u0\le\log_4(c^t)\le\log_3(c^t)=\log\log u. Differentiating ψc\psi_c,

ψc′(t)=2C(log⁡3(ct)−log⁡4(ct))(ddtlog⁡3(ct)−ddtlog⁡4(ct))+D ddtlog⁡3(ct)−(D+12−2C)ddtlog⁡4(ct),\psi_c'(t)=2C\bigl(\log_3(c^t)-\log_4(c^t)\bigr) \Bigl(\frac{d}{dt}\log_3(c^t)-\frac{d}{dt}\log_4(c^t)\Bigr) +D\,\frac{d}{dt}\log_3(c^t)-\bigl(D+\tfrac12-2C\bigr)\frac{d}{dt}\log_4(c^t),

so

∣ψc′(t)∣≤2Clog⁡log⁡u+D+∣D+12−2C∣tlog⁡u≤K′t,K′=2C+D+∣D+12−2C∣,|\psi_c'(t)|\le\frac{2C\log\log u+D+|D+\tfrac12-2C|}{t\log u}\le\frac{K'}{t}, \qquad K'=2C+D+|D+\tfrac12-2C|,

because log⁡log⁡u≤log⁡u\log\log u\le\log u. Together with the derivative −1/t-1/t of −log⁡(tlog⁡c)-\log(t\log c) this gives ∣ηc′(t)∣≤K1/t|\eta_c'(t)|\le K_1/t for t≥t0(c)t\ge t_0(c), with K1=K′+1K_1=K'+1. Integrating over [N,N+H][N,N+H] for N≥t0(c)N\ge t_0(c) and H≥1H\ge1,

∣ηc(N+H)−ηc(N)∣≤K1∫NN+Hdtt=K1log⁡(1+HN).|\eta_c(N+H)-\eta_c(N)|\le K_1\int_N^{N+H}\frac{dt}{t} =K_1\log\Bigl(1+\frac HN\Bigr).

Step 2: the geometric block mean (Theorem 2.2)

Let N≥t0(c)N\ge t_0(c) be an integer and H≥1H\ge1. The product of consecutive quotients telescopes exactly:

∏j=NN+H−1Rc(cj)=∏j=NN+H−1V(cj+1)V(cj)=V(cN+H)V(cN).\prod_{j=N}^{N+H-1}R_c(c^j)=\prod_{j=N}^{N+H-1}\frac{V(c^{j+1})}{V(c^j)} =\frac{V(c^{N+H})}{V(c^N)} .

Taking logarithms and applying (5) at t=N+Ht=N+H and t=Nt=N,

∑j=NN+H−1log⁡Rc(cj)=Hlog⁡c+ηc(N+H)−ηc(N)+E(cN+H)−E(cN),\sum_{j=N}^{N+H-1}\log R_c(c^j)=H\log c+\eta_c(N+H)-\eta_c(N)+E(c^{N+H})-E(c^N),

and Step 1 bounds the last four terms by K1log⁡(1+H/N)+2KK_1\log(1+H/N)+2K. Hence, with Δ(N,H)=(1+log⁡(1+H/N))/H\Delta(N,H)=(1+\log(1+H/N))/H and K2=max⁡(K1,2K)K_2=\max(K_1,2K),

∣1H∑j=NN+H−1log⁡Rc(cj)−log⁡c∣≤K2 Δ(N,H).(6)\Bigl|\frac1H\sum_{j=N}^{N+H-1}\log R_c(c^j)-\log c\Bigr|\le K_2\,\Delta(N,H). \tag{6}

Step 3: boundedness and unit-interval variation (Lemma 3.1)

First, RcR_c is bounded. By (F), for x≥x1x\ge x_1,

Rc(x)=M(cx)M(x) eE(cx)−E(x)≤e2KM(cx)M(x),M(cx)M(x)=c⋅log⁡xlog⁡(cx)⋅eΨ(cx)−Ψ(x).R_c(x)=\frac{M(cx)}{M(x)}\,e^{E(cx)-E(x)}\le e^{2K}\frac{M(cx)}{M(x)},\qquad \frac{M(cx)}{M(x)}=c\cdot\frac{\log x}{\log(cx)}\cdot e^{\Psi(cx)-\Psi(x)} .

Here log⁡x/log⁡(cx)→1\log x/\log(cx)\to1, and writing x=ctx=c^t, Step 1 gives ∣Ψ(cx)−Ψ(x)∣=∣ψc(t+1)−ψc(t)∣≤K′/t→0|\Psi(cx)-\Psi(x)|=|\psi_c(t+1)-\psi_c(t)|\le K'/t\to0. So M(cx)/M(x)→cM(cx)/M(x)\to c, and there are KcK_c and x2(c)x_2(c) with

1≤Rc(x)≤Kc(x≥x2(c)).1\le R_c(x)\le K_c\qquad(x\ge x_2(c)).

Now let x≥max⁡(x2(c),2)x\ge\max(x_2(c),2) and 0≤h≤10\le h\le1. Put A=V(cx)A=V(cx), B=V(x)B=V(x), δ=V(c(x+h))−V(cx)∈[0,⌈c⌉]\delta=V(c(x+h))-V(cx)\in[0,\lceil c\rceil] and ϵ=V(x+h)−V(x)∈[0,1]\epsilon=V(x+h)-V(x)\in[0,1]. Then

Rc(x+h)−Rc(x)=A+δB+ϵ−AB=Bδ−AϵB(B+ϵ),R_c(x+h)-R_c(x)=\frac{A+\delta}{B+\epsilon}-\frac AB =\frac{B\delta-A\epsilon}{B(B+\epsilon)},

so, using B+ϵ≥BB+\epsilon\ge B, δ≤⌈c⌉\delta\le\lceil c\rceil, ϵ≤1\epsilon\le1 and A/B≤KcA/B\le K_c,

∣Rc(x+h)−Rc(x)∣≤δB+AϵB2≤⌈c⌉+KcV(x)≤K3 log⁡xx,(7)|R_c(x+h)-R_c(x)|\le\frac{\delta}{B}+\frac{A\epsilon}{B^2} \le\frac{\lceil c\rceil+K_c}{V(x)}\le K_3\,\frac{\log x}{x}, \tag{7}

with K3=(⌈c⌉+Kc)/c0K_3=(\lceil c\rceil+K_c)/c_0 by Chebyshev's bound. The right side tends to 00.

Step 4: the integer block mean (Proposition 3.2)

Put nj=⌈cj⌉n_j=\lceil c^j\rceil, so 0≤nj−cj<10\le n_j-c^j<1, and take an integer N≥t0(c)N\ge t_0(c) so large that cN≥max⁡(x2(c),2)c^N\ge\max(x_2(c),2) and cN≥ec^N\ge e. By (7) with x=cjx=c^j and h=nj−cjh=n_j-c^j,

∣Rc(nj)−Rc(cj)∣≤K3 log⁡(cj)cj=K3log⁡c⋅jcj(j≥N).|R_c(n_j)-R_c(c^j)|\le K_3\,\frac{\log(c^j)}{c^j}=K_3\log c\cdot\frac{j}{c^j} \qquad(j\ge N).

Both quotients are at least 11, and ∣log⁡a−log⁡b∣≤∣a−b∣|\log a-\log b|\le|a-b| for a,b≥1a,b\ge1 by the mean value theorem, so the same bound holds for the logarithms. Summing,

∣∑j=NN+H−1(log⁡Rc(nj)−log⁡Rc(cj))∣≤K3log⁡c∑j≥Njcj≤K4 NcN,\Bigl|\sum_{j=N}^{N+H-1}\bigl(\log R_c(n_j)-\log R_c(c^j)\bigr)\Bigr| \le K_3\log c\sum_{j\ge N}\frac{j}{c^j}\le K_4\,\frac{N}{c^N},

because

∑j≥Njcj=c−N∑i≥0N+ici≤Nc−N∑i≥01+ici=c2(c−1)2⋅NcN.\sum_{j\ge N}\frac{j}{c^j}=c^{-N}\sum_{i\ge0}\frac{N+i}{c^i} \le Nc^{-N}\sum_{i\ge0}\frac{1+i}{c^i}=\frac{c^2}{(c-1)^2}\cdot\frac{N}{c^N}.

Combining with (6),

∣1H∑j=NN+H−1log⁡Rc(nj)−log⁡c∣≤K2 Δ(N,H)+K4 NHcN.(P)\Bigl|\frac1H\sum_{j=N}^{N+H-1}\log R_c(n_j)-\log c\Bigr| \le K_2\,\Delta(N,H)+K_4\,\frac{N}{Hc^N}. \tag{P}

Step 5: a near-hit in every sampled block (Theorem 3.3, display (8))

Let sj=Rc(nj)s_j=R_c(n_j) for N≤j≤N+H−1N\le j\le N+H-1 and let S=(∏jsj)1/HS=(\prod_js_j)^{1/H} be their geometric mean, so that log⁡S−log⁡c\log S-\log c is the left side of (P). Since Δ(N,H)≤1+log⁡2\Delta(N,H)\le1+\log2 for all N,H≥1N,H\ge1 (the function H↦(1+log⁡(1+H))/HH\mapsto(1+\log(1+H))/H is decreasing) and N/cNN/c^N is bounded, the left side of (P) is bounded by a constant K5K_5, and ∣ev−1∣≤e∣v∣∣v∣|e^v-1|\le e^{|v|}|v| gives

∣S−c∣≤c eK5(K2 Δ(N,H)+K4 NHcN).|S-c|\le c\,e^{K_5}\Bigl(K_2\,\Delta(N,H)+K_4\,\frac{N}{Hc^N}\Bigr).

If some sjs_j equals cc the block contains an exact hit. Otherwise one of three cases holds.

Every sj>cs_j>c. A geometric mean is at least the minimum, so min⁡j∣sj−c∣=min⁡jsj−c≤S−c\min_j|s_j-c|=\min_js_j-c\le S-c.

Every sj<cs_j<c. A geometric mean is at most the maximum, so min⁡j∣sj−c∣=c−max⁡jsj≤c−S\min_j|s_j-c|=c-\max_js_j\le c-S.

Some sj<cs_j<c and some sk>cs_k>c. Then there are consecutive indices i,i+1i,i+1 in the block with sis_i and si+1s_{i+1} on opposite sides of cc (walk from jj toward kk and stop at the first change of side). Say si<c<si+1s_i<c<s_{i+1}; the other case is symmetric. Since ci+1−ci≥(c−1)cN>1c^{i+1}-c^i\ge(c-1)c^N>1 for large NN, ni<ni+1n_i<n_{i+1}. Let m∗m^\ast be the largest integer in [ni,ni+1)[n_i,n_{i+1}) with Rc(m∗)<cR_c(m^\ast)<c; then Rc(m∗+1)≥cR_c(m^\ast+1)\ge c, so cc lies between Rc(m∗)R_c(m^\ast) and Rc(m∗+1)R_c(m^\ast+1), and by (7) with h=1h=1,

∣Rc(m∗)−c∣≤Rc(m∗+1)−Rc(m∗)≤K3 log⁡m∗m∗≤K3 log⁡(cN)cN=K3log⁡c⋅NcN,|R_c(m^\ast)-c|\le R_c(m^\ast+1)-R_c(m^\ast) \le K_3\,\frac{\log m^\ast}{m^\ast} \le K_3\,\frac{\log(c^N)}{c^N}=K_3\log c\cdot\frac{N}{c^N},

because t↦(log⁡t)/tt\mapsto(\log t)/t is decreasing for t≥et\ge e and m∗≥nN≥cN≥em^\ast\ge n_N\ge c^N\ge e.

In every case, using N/(HcN)≤N/cNN/(Hc^N)\le N/c^N, there is a constant CcC_c with

min⁡x∈NnN≤x≤nN+H−1∣Rc(x)−c∣≤Cc(Δ(N,H)+NcN)(8)\min_{\substack{x\in\mathbb N\\ n_N\le x\le n_{N+H-1}}}|R_c(x)-c| \le C_c\Bigl(\Delta(N,H)+\frac{N}{c^N}\Bigr) \tag{8}

for all large NN and all H≥1H\ge1.

Step 6: near-hits in every growing multiplicative window (display (9))

Let L(X)→∞L(X)\to\infty and set N=⌈log⁡cX⌉N=\lceil\log_cX\rceil and H=⌊log⁡cL(X)⌋H=\lfloor\log_cL(X)\rfloor. For large XX, L(X)≥cL(X)\ge c gives H≥1H\ge1, and N→∞N\to\infty, H→∞H\to\infty. The sampled block lies in [X,cXL(X)][X,cXL(X)]: nN≥cN≥Xn_N\ge c^N\ge X, while cN<clog⁡cX+1=cXc^N<c^{\log_cX+1}=cX and cH−1≤L(X)/cc^{H-1}\le L(X)/c give

nN+H−1<cN+H−1+1<cX⋅L(X)c+1=XL(X)+1≤cXL(X)n_{N+H-1}<c^{N+H-1}+1<cX\cdot\frac{L(X)}{c}+1=XL(X)+1\le cXL(X)

once (c−1)XL(X)≥1(c-1)XL(X)\ge1. Hence by (8),

min⁡x∈NX≤x≤cXL(X)∣Rc(x)−c∣≤ω(X):=Cc(Δ(N,H)+NcN)⟶0,(9)\min_{\substack{x\in\mathbb N\\ X\le x\le cXL(X)}}|R_c(x)-c| \le\omega(X):=C_c\Bigl(\Delta(N,H)+\frac{N}{c^N}\Bigr)\longrightarrow0, \tag{9}

since Δ(N,H)≤(1+log⁡(1+H))/H→0\Delta(N,H)\le(1+\log(1+H))/H\to0 as H→∞H\to\infty and N/cN→0N/c^N\to0 as N→∞N\to\infty. This is clause 2 of the statement. Clause 1 follows by taking, say, L(X)=XL(X)=X: for each large integer kk there is an integer nk∈[k,ck2]n_k\in[k,ck^2] with ∣Rc(nk)−c∣≤ω(k)→0|R_c(n_k)-c|\le\omega(k)\to0, and nk→∞n_k\to\infty.

Step 7: the cluster interval (Theorem 3.4 and Corollary 3.5)

By Step 3, 1≤Rc(n)≤Kc1\le R_c(n)\le K_c for large integers nn, so αc≤βc\alpha_c\le\beta_c are finite, both are subsequential limits, and Cc\mathcal C_c is a closed subset of [αc,βc][\alpha_c,\beta_c]. By (7) with h=1h=1, the adjacent variation ∣Rc(n+1)−Rc(n)∣≤K3(log⁡n)/n|R_c(n+1)-R_c(n)|\le K_3(\log n)/n tends to 00.

Let αc<y<βc\alpha_c<y<\beta_c and let n0≥max⁡(x2(c),3)n_0\ge\max(x_2(c),3) be given. Since αc<y\alpha_c<y there is n1>n0n_1>n_0 with Rc(n1)<yR_c(n_1)<y, and since βc>y\beta_c>y there is n2>n0n_2>n_0 with Rc(n2)>yR_c(n_2)>y. If n1<n2n_1<n_2, let nn be the largest integer in [n1,n2)[n_1,n_2) with Rc(n)<yR_c(n)<y, so that Rc(n+1)≥yR_c(n+1)\ge y; if n2<n1n_2<n_1, let nn be the largest integer in [n2,n1)[n_2,n_1) with Rc(n)>yR_c(n)>y, so that Rc(n+1)≤yR_c(n+1)\le y. Either way n>n0n>n_0 and yy lies between Rc(n)R_c(n) and Rc(n+1)R_c(n+1), so

∣Rc(n)−y∣≤∣Rc(n+1)−Rc(n)∣≤K3 log⁡n0n0.|R_c(n)-y|\le|R_c(n+1)-R_c(n)|\le K_3\,\frac{\log n_0}{n_0}.

Letting n0n_0 run through an increasing sequence produces integers n(k)→∞n^{(k)}\to\infty with Rc(n(k))→yR_c(n^{(k)})\to y, so y∈Ccy\in\mathcal C_c. Hence (αc,βc)⊆Cc⊆[αc,βc](\alpha_c,\beta_c)\subseteq\mathcal C_c\subseteq[\alpha_c,\beta_c], and closedness gives Cc=[αc,βc]\mathcal C_c=[\alpha_c,\beta_c]. By clause 1, c∈Ccc\in\mathcal C_c, that is, αc≤c≤βc\alpha_c\le c\le\beta_c.

For the real variable, let x≥1x\ge1 be real, n=⌊x⌋n=\lfloor x\rfloor and h=x−n∈[0,1)h=x-n\in[0,1); (7) gives ∣Rc(x)−Rc(n)∣≤K3(log⁡n)/n→0|R_c(x)-R_c(n)|\le K_3(\log n)/n\to0. So a sequence of reals xk→∞x_k\to\infty has Rc(xk)→yR_c(x_k)\to y exactly when Rc(⌊xk⌋)→yR_c(\lfloor x_k\rfloor)\to y, and the sets of subsequential limits over the reals and over the integers coincide. This is clause 3.

Finally, exactly one of αc=βc\alpha_c=\beta_c and αc<βc\alpha_c<\beta_c holds. In the first case Rc(n)R_c(n) converges to the common value, which is cc since c∈[αc,βc]c\in[\alpha_c,\beta_c], and the real-variable statement gives Rc(x)→cR_c(x)\to c. In the second, Cc\mathcal C_c is a nondegenerate interval containing cc, hence uncountable. This is Corollary 3.5 and completes the proof of Theorem 1.1.

The dyadic renewal identity (Proposition 6.1), for c=2c=2

The set of totient values is closed under doubling: if v=φ(m)v=\varphi(m) and mm is even, write m=2am′m=2^am' with a≥1a\ge1 and m′m' odd, so that φ(2m)=2aφ(m′)=2⋅2a−1φ(m′)=2φ(m)\varphi(2m)=2^a\varphi(m')=2\cdot2^{a-1}\varphi(m')=2\varphi(m); if mm is odd, φ(4m)=φ(4)φ(m)=2φ(m)\varphi(4m)=\varphi(4)\varphi(m)=2\varphi(m). Call a totient value vv dyadically primitive if v/2v/2 is not a totient value (this includes v=1v=1, the only odd value), and let P(x)P(x) be the number of dyadically primitive values in [1,x][1,x].

Every totient value vv is 2kb2^kb for exactly one pair (k,b)(k,b) with k≥0k\ge0 and bb dyadically primitive. Existence: halve vv while the result is a totient value; the process stops after k≤log⁡2vk\le\log_2v steps at a primitive bb. Uniqueness: if 2kb=2k′b′2^kb=2^{k'}b' with b,b′b,b' primitive and k>k′k>k', then b′=2k−k′bb'=2^{k-k'}b and b′/2=2k−k′−1bb'/2=2^{k-k'-1}b is a totient value by closure under doubling, contradicting the primitivity of b′b'; so k=k′k=k' and b=b′b=b'. Counting the values in [1,x][1,x] by kk,

V(x)=∑k≥0P(x/2k),V(x)=\sum_{k\ge0}P\bigl(x/2^k\bigr),

a finite sum since P(z)=0P(z)=0 for z<1z<1. Replacing xx by 2x2x and shifting the index,

V(2x)−V(x)=P(2x)+∑k≥1P(2x/2k)−∑k≥0P(x/2k)=P(2x).V(2x)-V(x)=P(2x)+\sum_{k\ge1}P\bigl(2x/2^k\bigr)-\sum_{k\ge0}P\bigl(x/2^k\bigr) =P(2x).

So the number of totient values in (x,2x](x,2x] equals the number of dyadically primitive values up to 2x2x; the preprint uses the identity for its entropy recursion.

What is not reconstructed

The matched quotient (V(c2x)−V(cx))/(V(cx)−V(x))(V(c^2x)-V(cx))/(V(cx)-V(x)) and its cluster interval (Theorem 4.1, Lemma 4.2, Corollary 4.3), which use Ford's Theorem 4 (V(cx)−V(x)≍cV(x)V(cx)-V(x)\asymp_cV(x)); the block-energy identity and the local second-moment criterion (Proposition 5.1, Lemma 5.2, Theorem 5.3), a sufficient condition for the limit that the preprint says no known estimate verifies; the entropy recursion along dyadic orbits (Theorem 6.2, Corollary 6.3); the log-periodic model (Proposition 7.1), whose stated role is that bounded-factor asymptotics, monotonicity, unit jumps and telescoping do not by themselves force the limit, so the argument above cannot be pushed to Rc(x)→cR_c(x)\to c without arithmetic input; and the segmented computation of §8 reporting V(1010)=1,311,179,363V(10^{10})=1{,}311{,}179{,}363, unverified here. None of these bears on the proof above.