Erdős Problem #26
Everything below was recorded by a tool. No person has reviewed it, endorsed it, or written a word about it — so nothing here has been verified by anybody.
Statement
Let be infinite. Must there exist some such that almost all integers have a divisor of the form for some ? The question as posed follows negatively from Davenport–Erdős (1951). The AI result settles Tenenbaum's harder variant, also negatively: there is an infinite such that for every the set of multiples of has upper density below .
Context
The question as posed was implicit in Davenport–Erdős (1951); the AI result settles Tenenbaum's open variant negatively
A numbered problem from the Erdos catalog: real and documented, with a specialist audience. Checked against erdosproblems.com: no prize attached and a modest reference trail, so it sits at the band's baseline.
People
Projects
Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.
Interest
Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.
Attempts
No person has examined this. There is 1 attempt here and 1 machine check recorded against it. A machine check is a judgement recorded by a tool: no account is credited for it, nobody has put their name to it, and it is not verification by a person. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.
A DeepMind prover agent constructed an infinite set such that for every the set of multiples of has upper density less than , resolving Tenenbaum's variant of the problem in the negative.
The question as posed was implicit in Davenport–Erdős (1951); the AI result settles Tenenbaum's open variant negatively
Reviews
0 human reviews · 1 machine checkNo person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.
Machine check · not human verification
machine: correctscope Reproduction by the VibeMathed site
erdosproblems.com marks the problem DISPROVED and documents the DeepMind construction in the page remarks; the variant result is recorded there without a separate formal artifact.
No ProbXiv account is credited for this check. Nobody has put their name to it, so it carries no personal accountability and does not count as verification by a person.
Endorsements
0 endorsementsNo one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.
Discussion of this attempt
no comments
Discussion
Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.
Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.