Skip to content

Computational bound for #385: verified F(n)>n up to 1.0011e12 #341

Description

@Sanexxxx777

For problem #385 (F(n) = max over composite m<n of m+p(m), p(m) the smallest prime factor of m — is F(n)>n for all sufficiently large n?), a computational update:

F(n) > n holds for all 10^4 < n ≤ 1.0011×10^12, except the two known values n = 267672 and n = 267680 (F(n) = n) — previously reported up to roughly 10^8 in the comments on Terry Tao's blog post on Siegel zeros (C.K.S., Aug 2024). This extends the verified range by a factor of about 10^4 and independently reproduces both known exceptional values (found by direct sieving, not by using the C.K.S. characterization of bad n).

Method: a segmented sieve computing τ(m) and the smallest prime factor spf(m) block-by-block (numpy, block 10^7), maintaining the running record F(n). The range was split into 8 shards with a 10^6 re-warm overlap (the running record is monotone, so each shard's local record catches up to the true one well within the overlap); shard boundaries were cross-checked against a single-process run bit-for-bit on a test range. ~18 core-hours on an Apple M3.

On the second question (does F(n)-n → ∞?): the minimum of F(n)-n grows monotonically across the swept range —

range max min(F(n)-n) observed so far
1.26e11 23,989
2.51e11 315,909
5.01e11 560,509
1.0011e12 868,399

consistent with F(n)-n → ∞.

Code and checkpoints: https://github.com/Sanexxxx777/erdos-computational-bounds/tree/main/sieve647

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions