alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

A congruence modulo p^2 for the p-th coefficient of e(1-z)^((1-z)/z)

AI contributions
  • Anthropic Claude Opus
View details

Abstract

Define E_n by sum_{n>=0} E_n z^n = exp(sum_{k>=1} z^k/(k(k+1))) = e(1-z)^((1-z)/z). Equivalently, e(1+1/x)^(-x) = sum_{n>=0} E_n (x+1)^(-n), the reciprocal of the expansion of e^(-1)(1+1/x)^x used by Yang in refinements of Carleman's inequality. We prove that for every odd prime p, E_p = -p/2 (mod p^2); in particular v_p(E_p) = 1. The proof is elementary. With Phi(u) = e(1+u)^(-1/u), it combines the two expressions of E_p through the coefficients of Phi that come from the identities e(1-z)^((1-z)/z) = Phi(-z)/(1-z) and e(1-z)^((1-z)/z) = Phi(z/(1-z)), and it reduces the congruence to the differential recurrence of the E_n read modulo p. A script checks the statement and the intermediate congruences for all odd primes below 200 and a few larger ones.

Introduction

Let

G(z)=exp⁡(∑k≥1zkk(k+1))=e(1−z)(1−z)/z=∑n≥0Enzn,G(z)=\exp\left(\sum_{k\geq1}\frac{z^k}{k(k+1)}\right)=e(1-z)^{(1-z)/z}=\sum_{n\geq0}E_nz^n,

so that E0=1E_0=1, E1=1/2E_1=1/2, E2=7/24E_2=7/24, E3=3/16E_3=3/16, E4=743/5760E_4=743/5760. The second expression follows from ∑k≥1zk/(k(k+1))=1+(1−z)log⁡(1−z)/z\sum_{k\geq1}z^k/(k(k+1))=1+(1-z)\log(1-z)/z, obtained from 1/(k(k+1))=1/k−1/(k+1)1/(k(k+1))=1/k-1/(k+1).

Putting z=1/(x+1)z=1/(x+1) gives

e(1+1x)−x=∑n≥0En(x+1)n.e\left(1+\frac{1}{x}\right)^{-x}=\sum_{n\geq0}\frac{E_n}{(x+1)^n}.

Yang [4 Ya2] wrote (1+1/x)x=e(1−∑n≥1bn(x+1)−n)(1+1/x)^x=e(1-\sum_{n\geq1}b_n(x+1)^{-n}) to refine Carleman’s inequality, so ∑nEnzn=1/(1−∑nbnzn)\sum_{n}E_nz^n=1/(1-\sum_{n}b_nz^n); the EnE_n are the coefficients SnS_n of [NG], where the pp-adic valuations of the bnb_n are studied. Equivalently, 1/G(z)=(1−z)e−1(1−z)−1/z1/G(z)=(1-z)e^{-1}(1-z)^{-1/z}, where e−1(1+x)1/xe^{-1}(1+x)^{1/x} has the coefficients tabulated in [OEIS]. We have found no previous result on the arithmetic of the EnE_n; see [1] for analytic properties of the bnb_n.

Expanding the exponential, EnE_n is a sum over the partitions of nn. For n=pn=p the only terms whose denominator is divisible by pp come from the partitions (p−1)+1(p-1)+1, pp and 1p1^p, namely 2(p−1)!p\frac{2}{(p-1)!p}, 1p(p+1)\frac{1}{p(p+1)} and 12pp!\frac{1}{2^p p!}. Multiplied by pp, they are congruent modulo pp to −1/2-1/2, 11 and −1/2-1/2 (by Fermat and Wilson), so the poles cancel and EpE_p is pp-integral. The point of the theorem is the next digit.

Theorem 1. For every odd prime pp,

Ep=−p2(modp2).E_p=-\frac{p}{2}\pmod{p^2}.

In particular vp(Ep)=1v_p(E_p)=1.

For p=2p=2 the statement fails, since E2=7/24E_2=7/24. For example E3=3/16E_3=3/16 and E5=215/2304E_5=215/2304, with E3+3/2=27/16=33/24E_3+3/2=27/16=3^3/2^4 and E5+5/2=5975/2304=52⋅239/(28⋅32)E_5+5/2=5975/2304=5^2\cdot239/(2^8\cdot3^2).

The proof (Section 3) uses two expressions of EpE_p through the coefficients of Φ(u)=e(1+u)−1/u\Phi(u)=e(1+u)^{-1/u}, the congruence (p−1j)≡(−1)j(1−pHj)(modp2)\binom{p-1}{j}\equiv(-1)^j(1-pH_j)\pmod{p^2}, and the recurrence of the EnE_n obtained by differentiating GG. Throughout, a≡b(modpj)a\equiv b\pmod{p^j} means that a−b∈pjZ(p)a-b\in p^j\mathbb{Z}_{(p)}, for rationals a,ba,b, and Hj=1+1/2+⋯+1/jH_j=1+1/2+\cdots+1/j, H0=0H_0=0.

Identities

Put

Φ(u)=e(1+u)−1/u=exp⁡(∑n≥1hnun),hn=(−1)n+1n+1,Φ(u)=∑k≥0φkuk.\Phi(u)=e(1+u)^{-1/u}=\exp\left(\sum_{n\geq1}h_nu^n\right),\qquad h_n=\frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{n+1},\qquad\Phi(u)=\sum_{k\geq0}\varphi_ku^k.

the second expression coming from 1−log⁡(1+u)/u=∑n≥1(−1)n+1un/(n+1)1-\log(1+u)/u=\sum_{n\geq1}(-1)^{n+1}u^n/(n+1). Thus φ0=1\varphi_0=1, φ1=1/2\varphi_1=1/2.

Lemma 2. As formal power series over Q\mathbb{Q},

(a)G(z)=Φ(−z)1−z,(b)G(z)=Φ(z1−z),(c)(n+1)En+1=∑j=0nEjn+2−j(n≥0).\text{(a)}\quad G(z)=\frac{\Phi(-z)}{1-z},\qquad\text{(b)}\quad G(z)=\Phi\left(\frac{z}{1-z}\right),\qquad\text{(c)}\quad(n+1)E_{n+1}=\sum_{j=0}^{n}\frac{E_j}{n+2-j}\quad(n\geq0).

Consequently, for n,k≥0n,k\geq0 and every integer p≥1p\geq1,

En=∑k=0n(−1)kφk,(−1)kφk=Ek−Ek−1 (E−1=0),Ep=∑k=1p(p−1k−1)φk.E_n=\sum_{k=0}^{n}(-1)^k\varphi_k,\qquad(-1)^k\varphi_k=E_k-E_{k-1}\ (E_{-1}=0),\qquad E_p=\sum_{k=1}^{p}\binom{p-1}{k-1}\varphi_k.

Proof. (a) Φ(−z)=e(1−z)1/z\Phi(-z)=e(1-z)^{1/z} and G(z)=e(1−z)1/z−1G(z)=e(1-z)^{1/z-1}. (b) With w=z/(1−z)w=z/(1-z) we have 1+w=(1−z)−11+w=(1-z)^{-1} and −1/w=−(1−z)/z-1/w=-(1-z)/z, so Φ(w)=e(1−z)(1−z)/z=G(z)\Phi(w)=e(1-z)^{(1-z)/z}=G(z). (c) Differentiate log⁡G=∑k≥1zk/(k(k+1))\log G=\sum_{k\geq1}z^k/(k(k+1)): G′=G∑m≥0zm/(m+2)G'=G\sum_{m\geq0}z^m/(m+2), and compare the coefficients of znz^n.

The first two identities in (1) follow from (a), since 1/(1−z)=∑j≥0zj1/(1-z)=\sum_{j\geq0}z^j. For the third,

[zp](z1−z)k=[zp−k](1−z)−k=(p−1k−1)[z^p]\left(\frac{z}{1-z}\right)^k=[z^{p-k}](1-z)^{-k}=\binom{p-1}{k-1}

for 1≤k≤p1\leq k\leq p, and 00 for k=0k=0 or k>pk>p; apply (b). □

Fix an odd prime pp. Let ψk\psi_k be the coefficients of Ψ(u)=exp⁡(∑n=1p−2hnun)\Psi(u)=\exp\left(\sum_{n=1}^{p-2}h_nu^n\right).

Lemma 3. (i) hnh_n is pp-integral for n≤p−2n\leq p-2, and ψk\psi_k is pp-integral for k≤p−1k\leq p-1. (ii) φk=ψk\varphi_k=\psi_k for k≤p−2k\leq p-2; in particular φk\varphi_k and EkE_k are pp-integral for k≤p−2k\leq p-2. (iii) φp−1=ψp−1−1/p\varphi_{p-1}=\psi_{p-1}-1/p, and φp+1/p\varphi_p+1/p is pp-integral. (iv) Ep=Ep−2+φp−1−φpE_p=E_{p-2}+\varphi_{p-1}-\varphi_p; hence EpE_p is pp-integral.

Proof. (i) The denominator of hnh_n is n+1≤p−1n+1\leq p-1. The coefficient ψk\psi_k is a sum of terms ∏jhjmj/mj!\prod_j h_j^{m_j}/m_j! over the partitions ∑jjmj=k\sum_jjm_j=k with parts j≤p−2j\leq p-2; for k≤p−1k\leq p-1 every mjm_j is less than $p.

(ii), (iii) Write Φ=Ψ⋅R\Phi=\Psi\cdot R with R=exp⁡(∑n≥p−1hnun)R=\exp\left(\sum_{n\geq p-1}h_nu^n\right). Since 2(p−1)≥p+12(p-1)\geq p+1, R≡1+hp−1up−1+hpup(modup+1)R\equiv1+h_{p-1}u^{p-1}+h_pu^p\pmod{u^{p+1}}, where hp−1=(−1)p/p=−1/ph_{p-1}=(-1)^p/p=-1/p and hp=1/(p+1)h_p=1/(p+1) is pp-integral. Hence φk=ψk\varphi_k=\psi_k for k≤p−2k\leq p-2, φp−1=ψp−1−1/p\varphi_{p-1}=\psi_{p-1}-1/p and φp=ψp+ψ1hp−1+hp=ψp−1/(2p)+hp\varphi_p=\psi_p+\psi_1h_{p-1}+h_p=\psi_p-1/(2p)+h_p.

In the expansion of ψp\psi_p, all partitions of pp into parts ≤p−2\leq p-2 have multiplicities less than pp except 1p1^p, which contributes h1p/p!=1/(2pp!)h_1^p/p!=1/(2^pp!). By Fermat and Wilson, p/(2pp!)=1/(2p(p−1)!)≡1/(2⋅(−1))=−1/2(modp)p/(2^pp!)=1/(2^p(p-1)!)\equiv1/(2\cdot(-1))=-1/2\pmod p, so ψp+1/(2p)\psi_p+1/(2p) is pp-integral and so is φp+1/p\varphi_p+1/p. By (1), (i) and the first part of (ii), Ek=∑i≤k(−1)iφiE_k=\sum_{i\leq k}(-1)^i\varphi_i is pp-integral for k≤p−2k\leq p-2.

(iv) By (1), Ep=Ep−2+(−1)p−1φp−1+(−1)pφpE_p=E_{p-2}+(-1)^{p-1}\varphi_{p-1}+(-1)^p\varphi_p, and pp is odd. The right-hand side is pp-integral by (ii) and (iii). □

Proof of Theorem 1

Step A: reduction to a congruence modulo pp. For 0≤j≤p−10\leq j\leq p-1, (p−1j)=∏i=1j(p−i)/i=(−1)j∏i=1j(1−p/i)≡(−1)j(1−pHj)(modp2)\binom{p-1}{j}=\prod_{i=1}^{j}(p-i)/i=(-1)^j\prod_{i=1}^{j}(1-p/i)\equiv(-1)^j(1-pH_j)\pmod{p^2}. In the last expression of (1) the terms k≤p−2k\leq p-2 have pp-integral φk\varphi_k, so

Ep≡∑k=1p−2(−1)k−1φk−pH∗+(p−1)φp−1+φp(modp2),H∗=∑k=1p−2(−1)k−1Hk−1φk.E_p\equiv\sum_{k=1}^{p-2}(-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k-pH^*+(p-1)\varphi_{p-1}+\varphi_p\pmod{p^2},\qquad H^*=\sum_{k=1}^{p-2}(-1)^{k-1}H_{k-1}\varphi_k.

Here ∑k=1p−2(−1)k−1φk=1−Ep−2\sum_{k=1}^{p-2}(-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k=1-E_{p-2} and (p−1)φp−1+φp=pφp−1−(φp−1−φp)(p-1)\varphi_{p-1}+\varphi_p=p\varphi_{p-1}-(\varphi_{p-1}-\varphi_p). Adding Lemma 3(iv),

2Ep≡1+pφp−1−pH∗=p(φp−1−H∗)(modp2),2E_p\equiv1+p\varphi_{p-1}-pH^*=p(\varphi_{p-1}-H^*)\pmod{p^2},

@ends_mid=1 by Lemma 3(iii). Since ψp−1\psi_{p-1} and H∗H^* are pp-integral, this already gives Ep≡0(modp)E_p \equiv0 \pmod{p}, and the theorem is equivalent to

ψp−1−H∗≡−1(modp).(1)\psi_{p-1}-H^* \equiv-1 \pmod{p}. \tag*{(1)}

Step B: the residue ψp−1\psi_{p-1}. From Ψ′=Ψ∑j=1p−2jhjuj−1\Psi'=\Psi\sum_{j=1}^{p-2}jh_j u^{j-1}, the coefficient of up−2u^{p-2} gives the exact identity (p−1)ψp−1=∑j=1p−2jhjψp−1−j(p-1)\psi_{p-1}=\sum_{j=1}^{p-2}jh_j\psi_{p-1-j}, and ψp−1−j=φp−1−j\psi_{p-1-j}=\varphi_{p-1-j} by Lemma 3(ii). Put k=p−1−jk=p-1-j, so 1≤k≤p−21\le k\le p-2. Modulo pp, p−1≡−1p-1\equiv-1, j≡−(k+1)j\equiv-(k+1) and hj=(−1)p−k/(p−k)≡(−1)k/kh_j=(-1)^{p-k}/(p-k)\equiv(-1)^k/k, so jhj≡−(−1)k(1+1/k)jh_j\equiv-(-1)^k(1+1/k) and

ψp−1≡∑k=1p−2(−1)k(1+1k)φk(modp).\psi_{p-1}\equiv\sum_{k=1}^{p-2}(-1)^k\left(1+\frac{1}{k}\right)\varphi_k \pmod{p}.

Since H∗=−∑k=1p−2(−1)kHk−1φkH^*=-\sum_{k=1}^{p-2}(-1)^kH_{k-1}\varphi_k and Hk−1+1/k=HkH_{k-1}+1/k=H_k,

ψp−1−H∗≡∑k=1p−2(−1)k(1+Hk)φk=Ep−2−1+∑k=1p−2(−1)kHkφk(modp).\psi_{p-1}-H^*\equiv\sum_{k=1}^{p-2}(-1)^k(1+H_k)\varphi_k=E_{p-2}-1+\sum_{k=1}^{p-2}(-1)^kH_k\varphi_k \pmod{p}.

Hence (2) is equivalent to

∑k=1p−2(−1)kHkφk≡−Ep−2(modp).(2)\sum_{k=1}^{p-2}(-1)^kH_k\varphi_k\equiv-E_{p-2}\pmod{p}. \tag*{(2)}

Step C: the recurrence. By (1) and summation by parts,

∑k=1p−2(−1)kHkφk=∑k=1p−2Hk(Ek−Ek−1)=Hp−2Ep−2−H1E0−∑k=1p−3(Hk+1−Hk)Ek=Hp−2Ep−2−1−∑k=1p−3Ekk+1.\begin{aligned} \sum_{k=1}^{p-2}(-1)^kH_k\varphi_k &=\sum_{k=1}^{p-2}H_k(E_k-E_{k-1})=H_{p-2}E_{p-2}-H_1E_0-\sum_{k=1}^{p-3}(H_{k+1}-H_k)E_k\\ &=H_{p-2}E_{p-2}-1-\sum_{k=1}^{p-3}\frac{E_k}{k+1}. \end{aligned}

Since Hp−1≡0(modp)H_{p-1}\equiv0\pmod{p} (pair ii with p−ip-i), Hp−2=Hp−1−1/(p−1)≡1H_{p-2}=H_{p-1}-1/(p-1)\equiv1. So (3) is equivalent to

2Ep−2≡1+∑k=1p−3Ekk+1=∑j=0p−3Ejj+1(modp).2E_{p-2}\equiv1+\sum_{k=1}^{p-3}\frac{E_k}{k+1}=\sum_{j=0}^{p-3}\frac{E_j}{j+1}\pmod{p}.

This is Lemma 2(c) with n=p−3n=p-3, namely (p−2)Ep−2=∑j=0p−3Ej/(p−1−j)(p-2)E_{p-2}=\sum_{j=0}^{p-3}E_j/(p-1-j), read modulo pp: all EjE_j with j≤p−2j\le p-2 are pp-integral, p−2≡−2p-2\equiv-2 and 1/(p−1−j)≡−1/(j+1)1/(p-1-j)\equiv-1/(j+1) for 0≤j≤p−30\le j\le p-3. This proves (3), hence (2) and the theorem. □\square

Remark 4. After Step A only E0,…,Ep−2E_0,\ldots,E_{p-2} and φ1,…,φp−2\varphi_1,\ldots,\varphi_{p-2} occur, and the congruence finally needed is the recurrence of the EnE_n at n=p−3n=p-3. For p=3p=3 all the sums in Steps B and C are empty or reduce to a single term, and the theorem reads E3=3/16≡−3/2(mod9)E_3=3/16\equiv-3/2\pmod{9}.

Numerical verification and a remark

The ancillary file verify_Ep_congruence.py (Python 3, no dependency, exact rational arithmetic, about thirty seconds) computes EnE_n by the recurrence of Lemma 2(c) and φk\varphi_k from the exponential, and checks, for all odd primes p<200p<200 and for p=251p=251, 307307, 401401: Lemma 2(a) and (b) coefficientwise up to zp+1z^{p+1}, and the third identity of (1); Lemma 3; each displayed congruence and equivalence of Steps A, B and C, and the summation by parts; and Theorem 1.

The next pp-adic digit (Ep+p/2)/p2(modp)(E_p+p/2)/p^2\pmod p is 0,1,3,9,0,12,14,30,1,3,9,0,12,14,3 for p=3,5,…,23p=3,5,\ldots,23 and shows no pattern. In the tested range, Ep≡−p/2(modp3)E_p\equiv-p/2\pmod{p^3} holds only for p=3p=3 and p=13p=13, which is compatible with a heuristic probability 1/p1/p for each pp.

Acknowledgement

Acknowledgement. Technical assistance: Claude (Anthropic).

References

ORCID 0009-0009-1526-1178

References

  1. [1]Y. Hu, C. Mortici, On the coefficients of an expansion of (1 + 1/x)^x related to Carleman’s inequality, arXiv:1401.2236 (2014).arxiv.org/abs/1401.2236
  2. [4]X. Yang, On Carleman’s inequality, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 253 (2001), 691–694.DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_4h4z5r68
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

Anthropic Claude Opus · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents