Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Asymptotic error terms in Bonse-type inequalities

Diego Marques, Pavel Trojovsky

TL;DR

The paper advances the understanding of Bonse-type inequalities by deriving an explicit asymptotic expansion for the logarithmic error term \\ E_n(x) \\) in the continuous Bonse framework, showing \\ E_n(x) = (x+2) \\frac{n}{\\log n} + O\\left(\\frac{n \\log\\log n}{\\log^2 n}\\right)\\ and establishing positivity for all sufficiently large \\ n \\ whenever \\ x>-2. It then characterizes the threshold function \\ Ψ(x) \\: for each \\ x>-2, identifying the minimal index from which the Bonse-type inequality holds; the paper proves \\ Ψ(0.1) = 24{,}154{,}953 \\ and provides both unconditional and RH-based upper bounds, with RH yielding substantially tighter bounds. A key structural result is that \\ Ψ(x) \\ is a non-increasing, right-continuous, piecewise-constant function whose jumps occur at a discrete set of thresholds \\ A_m \\, with \\ A_m = \,\sup_{n\ge m} \\alpha_n \\ and \\ E_n(x) = a_n + b_n x \\. The work also demonstrates the non-surjectivity of \\ Ψ \\, showing gaps of consecutive integers in its range, and provides an explicit RH-conditioned framework for improved thresholds. Overall, the results give a complete asymptotic description of the error term, certify the conjecture, and illuminate the fine-scale behavior of Bonse-type inequalities.

Abstract

Let $p_n$ denote the $n$-th prime. In 2000, Panaitopol established the inequality $p_1 \cdots p_n > p_{n+1}^{n - π(n)}$ for all $n \geq 2$, where $π(x)$ is the prime counting function. In 2021, Yang and Liao refined this by introducing the exponent $k(n,x) = n - π(n) + \frac{π(n)}{π(\log n)} - x \cdot π(π(n))$, proving the inequality holds for $x = 2$ and $n \geq 8$. In 2022, Marques and Trojovský extended this to $x = 1.4$ for $n \geq 21$ and conjectured its validity for $x = 0.1$ when $n \geq 24,154,953$. This paper confirms the conjecture by analyzing the error term $E_n(x) = \log(p_1 \cdots p_n) - k(n,x) \log p_{n+1}$. Also, we derive the asymptotic expansion to $E_n(x)$ demonstrating that it is positive for all sufficiently large $n$ when $x > -2$. For each $x > -2$, we identify a minimal integer $Ψ(x)$ such that $E_n(x) > 0$ for all $n \geq Ψ(x)$, precisely determining $Ψ(0.1) = 24,154,953$. Additionally, we establish effective upper bounds for $Ψ(x)$ both unconditionally and under the Riemann Hypothesis, with the conditional bounds showing a significant improvement. Our analysis fully resolves the conjecture and characterizes $Ψ(x)$ as a non-increasing, piecewise constant function, exhibiting discontinuities at a discrete set of threshold points. These results advance the understanding of Bonse-type inequalities and their asymptotic behavior.

Asymptotic error terms in Bonse-type inequalities

TL;DR

The paper advances the understanding of Bonse-type inequalities by deriving an explicit asymptotic expansion for the logarithmic error term \\ E_n(x) \\) in the continuous Bonse framework, showing \\ E_n(x) = (x+2) \\frac{n}{\\log n} + O\\left(\\frac{n \\log\\log n}{\\log^2 n}\\right)\\ and establishing positivity for all sufficiently large \\ n \\ whenever \\ x>-2. It then characterizes the threshold function \\ Ψ(x) \\: for each \\ x>-2, identifying the minimal index from which the Bonse-type inequality holds; the paper proves \\ Ψ(0.1) = 24{,}154{,}953 \\ and provides both unconditional and RH-based upper bounds, with RH yielding substantially tighter bounds. A key structural result is that \\ Ψ(x) \\ is a non-increasing, right-continuous, piecewise-constant function whose jumps occur at a discrete set of thresholds \\ A_m \\, with \\ A_m = \,\sup_{n\ge m} \\alpha_n \\ and \\ E_n(x) = a_n + b_n x \\. The work also demonstrates the non-surjectivity of \\ Ψ \\, showing gaps of consecutive integers in its range, and provides an explicit RH-conditioned framework for improved thresholds. Overall, the results give a complete asymptotic description of the error term, certify the conjecture, and illuminate the fine-scale behavior of Bonse-type inequalities.

Abstract

Let denote the -th prime. In 2000, Panaitopol established the inequality for all , where is the prime counting function. In 2021, Yang and Liao refined this by introducing the exponent , proving the inequality holds for and . In 2022, Marques and Trojovský extended this to for and conjectured its validity for when . This paper confirms the conjecture by analyzing the error term . Also, we derive the asymptotic expansion to demonstrating that it is positive for all sufficiently large when . For each , we identify a minimal integer such that for all , precisely determining . Additionally, we establish effective upper bounds for both unconditionally and under the Riemann Hypothesis, with the conditional bounds showing a significant improvement. Our analysis fully resolves the conjecture and characterizes as a non-increasing, piecewise constant function, exhibiting discontinuities at a discrete set of threshold points. These results advance the understanding of Bonse-type inequalities and their asymptotic behavior.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 16 sections, 15 theorems, 124 equations, 3 figures, 4 tables.

Key Result

Theorem 1.1

Let $x<2$ be a real number. Then Furthermore, there exist absolute constants $C_1$ and $C_2$ such that for every $n\ge 3468$ one has Consequently, if then $E_n(x)>0$. One admissible choice of constants is $(C_1,C_2)=(8,14)$.

Figures (3)

  • Figure 1: Verified staircase segments of $\Psi(x)$ (logarithmic vertical axis). Blue segments show intervals where $\Psi$ is constant. Red dots are isolated evaluations. Short gray ticks indicate plateau endpoints.
  • Figure 2: Sampled thresholds $\alpha_n$ (solutions of $E_n(x)=0$). The upper envelope in $n$ approximates the jump set of $\Psi$.
  • Figure 3: Certified lower bounds $\Delta_m$ for the lengths of plateaux $(A_{m+1},A_m]$ (logarithmic vertical axis).

Theorems & Definitions (28)

  • Conjecture 1
  • Theorem 1.1
  • Corollary 1.1
  • Corollary 1.2
  • Corollary 1.3
  • Theorem 1.2
  • Lemma 2.1: Corollary 5.2 of b1
  • Lemma 2.2: Corollary 2 of alex
  • Lemma 2.3: Proposition 20 of alex
  • Remark 4.1
  • ...and 18 more