Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Dirichlet density alone does not give a counting asymptotic

Statement refuted

False inference: existence of a Dirichlet density forces an ordinary counting asymptotic with that density. Let S=k0([10k,210k)N),SP=SP. Both S among the positive integers and SP among the primes have Dirichlet density d=log2/log10, but their relative counting ratios along 10m and 210m tend respectively to 1/9 and 5/9.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The data and hypotheses of the statement.

[F1]

For Res>0, zeta admits the fractional-part integral formula with a simple residue-one pole at 1: For every complex number s with Res>0 and s1, ζ(s)=ss1s1{x}xs1dx, where {x}=xx is the fractional part. The integral defines a holomorphic function on Res>0, so the right-hand side is meromorphic there with a single simple pole at s=1 of residue 1.

[F2]

The Riemann zeta function has its Euler product on the half-plane Res>1: For every sC with Res>1, ζ(s)=p11ps, where the product ranges over the primes and converges absolutely and locally uniformly on Res>1.

[F3]

Primes in one reduced residue class have Dirichlet density 1 over phi(q): Let q1 and (a,q)=1. Then the set of primes pa(modq) has relative Dirichlet density 1/φ(q) among the primes: pa(q)ps=1φ(q)log1s1+O(1)(s1, s>1).

[F4]

Prime number theorem: As x, π(x)x/logx,θ(x)x,ψ(x)x. These three asymptotic assertions are equivalent.

[F5]

Chebyshev psi prime number theorem error: There is an absolute c>0 such that for x2, ψ(x)=x+O(xeclogx).

Counterexample

1.1

Write s=1+ϵ>1. For a decreasing function ts, the discrepancy between its sum and integral on the kth block is at most 10ks. Summing these discrepancies is O(1) uniformly as ϵ0. The integrals form a geometric series, giving nSns=(12ϵ)/[ϵ(110ϵ)]+O(1). Since ϵζ(1+ϵ)1, the relative density is log2/log10.

F1algebra
1.2

For primes, the Euler logarithm gives pps=log(1/ϵ)+O(1): all terms of exponent at least two sum to at most n2j2nj<, and the zeta pole determines its logarithm. Finite sets have zero relative density, and finite additivity for disjoint sets follows by taking limits of their finite sum identities. The established progression density theorem is an instance of this weighted limit; it does not itself supply an unweighted limit.

F1F2F3
1.3

The quantitative psi theorem gives θ(x)=x+O(xeclogx) by subtracting higher prime powers (at most j=2log2xx1/jlogx=O(xlog2x)). Summing the identity 1=logp/logx+logppxdt/(tlog2t) and splitting at square root x then gives π(x)=Li(x)+E(x) with E(x)=O(xeclogx); the constant 2/log2 is harmless here. On each decade block, Stieltjes integration by parts of xs/logx against θ(x)x, or of xs against E, shows pSps=2w(logx)xslogxdx+O(1), uniformly for 1<s2. Indeed all block endpoint errors are bounded by Ck1ecklog10, and the interior errors by C2eclogxdx/x, both finite. Here w is the periodic indicator of [0,log2) modulo log10; the first partial block changes only O(1).

F5algebra
2.1

Up to an endpoint error at most one, the counts at 10m and 210m are respectively (10m1)/9 and (10m+11)/9. Dividing by the two endpoints yields 1/9 and 5/9. Thus an integer counting asymptotic already fails despite the density limit.

step 1.1algebra
2.2

Set y=logx. The primitive of w(y)d is bounded because its integral over a period is zero. Integration by parts against eϵy/y therefore bounds its contribution by O(1), uniformly as epsilon tends to zero. The mean contribution is dlog2eϵydy/y=dlog(1/ϵ)+O(1): split at 1/ϵ and substitute ϵy on the tail. Combining with the prime denominator proves the claimed relative Dirichlet density.

step 1.2step 1.3
3.1

For the prime counting limits, fix J. At X=10m, the last J completed blocks, indexed k=mj with 1jJ, have counts π(210k)π(10k)10k/log(10k). Relative to π(X)X/logX, their limits sum to j=1J10j. Earlier blocks contribute at most π(10mJ)/π(10m)10J. Let J tend to infinity to get 1/9. At X=210m, the current block contributes relative limit 1/2, and the preceding blocks contribute (1/2)j110j=1/18, totaling 5/9. Endpoints are composite for m positive, so they add no ambiguity. These unequal limits refute the inference for primes too.

F4step 2.2

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

23 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources