Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-09-24 (gpt-6-sol)
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.

Chebyshev psi prime number theorem error

Statement

Assume countable choice.

There is an absolute c>0 such that for x≥2, ψ(x)=x+O(xe−clog⁡x).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable choice and the data and hypotheses of the statement.

[F1]

Zeta explicit formula zero free error balance: For x≥2 and finite T≥3, the classical region and truncated explicit formula give ψ(x)−x=O(xe−c0log⁡x/log⁡(T+2)log⁡2T+xlog⁡2(xT)T+log⁡x). Constants may be enlarged and the positive region constant decreased. The zero sum used in the proof is finite.

[F2]

Zeta bounds in classical zero free region: There are 0<c2<c1<c0 and C>0 such that for ∣t∣≥3 and σ≥1−c1/log⁡(∣t∣+2), ∣ζ′/ζ(σ+it)∣≤Clog⁡(∣t∣+2)≤Clog⁡2(∣t∣+2). In the narrower c2 region, ∣1/ζ(s)∣≤Clog⁡(∣t∣+2). For ∣t∣≤3 and 1−c2/log⁡(∣t∣+2)≤σ≤2, ζ′/ζ(s)+1/(s−1)=O(1),1/ζ(s)=O(∣s−1∣), with removable interpretations at one.

Proof

1.1F1

Under countable choice, the supplied finite explicit-formula bound applies. Put u=log⁡x and choose a fixed A>0. For sufficiently large x take T=eAu≥3. Then log⁡(T+2)=Au+O(e−Au), so the finite-zero term is O(xu2e−(c0/A)u+o(1)), the truncation term is O(xu4e−Au), and the remaining error is O(u2).

2.1step 1.1algebra

Choose 0<c<min⁡(A,c0/A). For any fixed k and positive epsilon, uke−ϵu is bounded; thus each error above is O(xe−cu). Enlarging the constant over the initial compact x-range proves the assertion for all x≥2.

3.1F2step 1.1step 2.1∎

The contour interpretation is consistent with the same bound: take σ1=1−c1/log⁡(T+2) with a sufficiently small region constant and σ0=1+1/log⁡x. Throughout ∣t∣≤T the left edge stays in the proved region. At high heights the derivative is O(log⁡T); integrating 1/∣s∣ gives a vertical contribution O(xσ1log⁡2T), and horizontal edges give O(xlog⁡2(xT)/T). At bounded height the pole-subtracted estimate bounds the derivative by O(1+1/∣s−1∣); on the left edge its integral is O(log⁡log⁡(T+2)). Only the pole at one is crossed. These edge bounds explain the scale used in the finite-zero proof.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

15 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