We prove the three identities in Sun's Conjecture VI, involving cubes of generalized central trinomial coefficients.
A common double integral represents their generating functions.
On two rational curves, this period reduces to quadratic expressions in Gauss hypergeometric functions associated with elliptic integrals.
A first-order identity recovers the derivative transverse to each curve and supplies the linear weights in the three series.
The constants are determined by an endpoint calculation and Bauer's identity.
Classical modular equations of degrees three, five, and seven then complete the evaluations.
We give explicit rational differential certificates for the period reductions and the transverse derivative identities.
Introduction
We prove the three cubic trinomial identities for 1/π in Sun’s Conjecture VI [7 Section 5]. The main step is a pair of one-parameter transformations for a common two-variable period, together with identities for its transverse derivatives. These formulas connect the three series to classical elliptic periods and modular equations.
Sun recorded the discovery of the three formulas on 1 and 2 October 2011 [9 Section 4] and published them together as Conjecture VI in [7]. He still described all three type-VI series as open in 2020 [8 p. 1275]. Our main result proves the complete conjecture.
Theorem 1.1.The following absolutely convergent identities hold:
Ramanujan’s 1914 paper [5] placed series for 1/π in the setting of elliptic integrals and modular equations. The subsequent theory includes transformations between different hypergeometric descriptions of elliptic periods; the work of Berndt, Bhargava, and Garvan [1] develops the alternative bases used below. Sun’s formulas bring generalized central trinomial coefficients into this setting. Their relation to Legendre polynomials is
Tn(b,c)=(b2−4c)n/2Pn(b2−4cb).(5)
Here Pn is the Legendre polynomial normalized by Pn(1)=1. For b2=4c, the expression is independent of the square root; after expansion it is a polynomial, which also gives its value when b2=4c. Thus the problem belongs to the study of generating functions of powers of Legendre polynomials.
Zudilin [11] obtained a transformation for a binomially weighted generating function of Legendre squares and used it to prove a family of Sun’s series. Van Hoeij, van Straten, and Zudilin [4 Section 6] later gave a Hadamard-product representation for the generating function of Legendre cubes and studied its fourth-order differential equation. That work provides a general framework for the cubic problem. The reductions here concern two particular rational curves: on each, the relevant period satisfies a third-order equation that is a symmetric square of a second-order equation. For the second curve, the resulting equation is related to the hypergeometric transformation for Domb numbers in Rogers [6 Theorem 3.1, equation (3.4)].
There is a further derivative to determine. If F(w)=∑anwn, then a weight An+B corresponds to applying Awd/dw+B to F. In our two-variable generating function, this derivative holds the trinomial parameter fixed, whereas restricting to a curve gives a tangent derivative. Differentiation and Legendre’s relation have already been used systematically to obtain series for 1/π from products of elliptic periods; see Wan [10 Section 2]. Here we recover the missing direction through a first-order identity. Its constant is fixed analytically, by an endpoint estimate on the first curve and Bauer’s identity on the second. The resulting formulas apply along the entire curves; the three series follow by evaluation at the required algebraic points.
The proof has three parts. Section 2 gives the double-integral representation. Sections 3–6 establish the first period transformation, its transverse derivative, and the first and third series. Section 7 proves the second series using a signature-three transformation and an explicit continuation path. Appendices A and B contain the rational differential certificates and the polynomial sign checks for that path. All square roots and continuation branches used in the proof are specified.
Both factors are positive under the stated hypotheses, so A>∣B∣. Thus the integral in Z equals (A2−B2)−1/2. Moreover dν(X) and dν(Y) become the beta measures du/(πu(1−u)) and dv/(πv(1−v)). The constant extracted from A2−B2 is (1−a2)(1−b2), which proves precisely the prefactor in (9). This argument also proves positivity of the original denominator, since all the linear factors in the substitution are positive. For (10), substitution gives s=2a/(3a+1)<0 and t=(a+1)/(1−a)∈(1/2,1). Also ∣a∣,∣b∣<1 there. Hence the same direct integral argument proves (11) on the entire stated interval. □
Set
U=1+3a1−a>1.(12)
The curve in the (s,t)-plane is s+t−2st=1, parametrized by s=(1−U)/2 and t=(1+U−1)/2.
initially in its disk of convergence, and continued analytically where stated. We use Clausen’s identity, Pfaff’s transformation, and Legendre’s relation in the forms recorded in [2 16.12.2, 15.8.1, 19.7.1]; the quadratic forms used below also follow by substitution in the Gauss equation.
Theorem 3.1. For U>1, put
m=21−1−U−2.
Then
Ψ(21−U,21+U−1)=4U3f(m)2+f(1−m)2.(13)
The coefficient 3 in this formula is fixed by the local behavior at U=1; it cannot be inferred from the differential equation alone.
Lemma 3.2. The function on the left of (13) is annihilated by
(2ϑ−1)3−U2(2ϑ+1)3,ϑ=UdUd.(14)
Proof. The equation follows by exact elimination from the Legendre recurrence. The derivation and explicit certificate are given in Appendix A. All identities used in that elimination are over a rational-function field. □
Proof of Theorem 3.1. Let f0=f(1/2) and f1=f′(1/2). The Gauss equation and Legendre’s relation give
f′′(1/2)=f0,f0f1=2/π.(15)
Put J(t)=3F2(1/2,1/2,1/2;2,2;t). Coefficient comparison in the defining series gives the contiguous identity
J(t)=8H(t)+(32−8/t)θtH(t)+48(1−1/t)θt2H(t).(16)
The apparent singularity at t=0 is removable. The quadratic Clausen identity is
H(t)=f(21−1−t)2.(17)
It follows from (15) that, with r=1−t,
H(t)=f02−π2r+4f12+f02r2+O(r3).
Substitution in (16) cancels the terms in r−1 and gives
J(1)=2f02−6f12.(18)
From (8), uniformly for 0≤t≤1 and small real s,
Ψ(s,t)=H(t)+8sJ(t)+O(s2).
For the uniform bound, the coefficient in (8) is at most the product of the corresponding coefficients of H(s)H(t), and H(1) is finite. Moreover J′(1) is finite by absolute convergence of its differentiated series, so J(t)=J(1)+O(1−t). Consequently, as δ↓0,
The Gauss equation, followed by the change of variable 4m(1−m)=U−2, shows that both functions satisfy
Y′′+2U(U2−1)3U2−1Y′+16U21Y=0.
Its symmetric square is exactly (14), after division by its leading coefficient. Hence u2,uv,v2 solve that equation. As δ=U−1↓0, the three combinations
uv,v2−u2,(v−u)2
have leading terms
f02,22f0f1δ,2f12δ,
respectively, all with nonzero coefficients. They therefore form a local basis. The right side of (13) is (3u2+v2)/4 and has the three coefficients in (19). Comparison in this basis proves the identity near U=1. Since the leading coefficient of (14) does not vanish on 1<U<∞, the identity continues along that interval. □
The transverse derivative
The weight An+B requires a derivative in w with h fixed. The period transformation gives instead a derivative along the curve a↦(h(a),w(a)). The next identity supplies the additional derivative needed to pass between these two directions.
The elementary endpoint estimate in the single cosine integral is
Tn(h,1/4)=(h+1)n2πnh+1(1+O(n−1)),
uniformly for h in a sufficiently small neighborhood of 1. The analogous differentiated estimate follows by inserting n(h+cosv)n−1 in the same integral. Expanding cosv=1−v2/2+O(v4) near zero and bounding the remaining interval geometrically proves both estimates. Cubing and summing gives
N∼π1−q1,hGh∼h+13hN,g=O(1).
Here the error in the differentiated sum is bounded by a convergent multiple of ∑n−3/2, and ∑n≥1qnn−1/2∼π/1−q follows by a rescaled Riemann sum. Since h′/h→4 and w′/w→−4, we have g′∼2N. Finally,
A0→83,A1→−81,R∼(−a)−1/2,
so E/R→32/(8π). This proves (20) on a neighborhood of zero and hence throughout the interval by its first-order equation and analytic continuation of the positive integral. □
Proof. Both Fλ(u) and Fλ(1−u) solve the Gauss equation
u(1−u)Y′′+(1−2u)Y′−λ(1−λ)Y=0.
Abel’s identity makes their Wronskian a constant multiple of 1/(u(1−u)). Euler’s integral, and the same integral differentiated in u, give
Fλ(1−u)=−σλlogu+O(1),dudFλ(1−u)∼−uσλ(u↓0).
Since Fλ(u)=1+O(u), the Wronskian constant is −σλ. This proves (22); its midpoint specialization gives (23). It also gives
Rλ′(u)=−u(1−u)Fλ(u)2σλ<0.(25)
Together with Rλ(1/2)=1 and Rλ(u)→∞ as u↓0, this proves existence and uniqueness of m.
At the complementary pair, Fλ(1−m)=NFλ(m), so (25) gives β′(m)=1. Set
A=Fλ(m)Fλ′(m),B=Fλ(1−m)Fλ′(1−m).
(22) and logarithmic differentiation of the defining equation for β give, respectively,
A+B=pNFλ(m)2σλ,β′′(m)=−p2d+2(B−A).
Finally, differentiation of (21) gives
[θxHλ(x)]x=4p=d2pAFλ(m)2.
Eliminating A,B proves (24).
For N=3 or 7, put γ=1/(N+1). The two modular equations needed are
(αβ)γ+((1−α)(1−β))γ=1.(26)
Here α,β∈(0,1) satisfy R1/2(β)=NR1/2(α), and all roots are positive. For N=3 this is [3 (1.2), p. 31]; for N=7 it is [3 Example 2, p. 39]. Their convention for degree is stated in their equation (1.1).
Lemma 5.2. At
m3=42−3,m7=168−37,
one has f(1−mN)=Nf(mN). Moreover,
(6θ+1)H(1/4)=π4,(42θ+5)H(1/64)=π16,θ=xdxd.(27)
Operators in this notation are applied before evaluation.
Proof. Use Lemma 5.1 with λ=1/2. The unique m∈(0,1/2) with R1/2(m)=N forms a complementary degree-N pair (1−m,m). (26) gives 2{m(1−m)}γ=1, which yields the stated values mN. For the inverse local branch through (m,1−m), put p=m(1−m) and d=1−2m. Twice differentiating the symmetric modular equation gives
The derivatives are taken in the period identity before specializing the parameter. For any constants A,B, Proposition 4.1 gives
(Aθw+B)G=8π3A2R+(B−AA0)g−AA1g′.(29)
At a=−1/7, insert (A,B)=(66,17). The coefficient of V is zero, and the right side is 5402/(11π). At a=−7/25, insert (A,B)=(3990,1147). Again the coefficient of V is zero, and the result is
95π406082+19π1684814=95π432(942+19514).
To identify the original series, use the scaling identity Tn(b,c)=(2c)nTn(b/(2c),1/4). At the first point, h=5/11 and w=1331/6912=2233/55296. At the second point, h=−31/95 and w=857375/2985984; the parity identity Tn(−h,1/4)=(−1)nTn(h,1/4) supplies the negative denominator in (4). Finally, ∣Tn(b,c)∣≤(∣b∣+2c)n proves absolute convergence: the respective geometric bounds are 16/27 and 343/512. It also justifies termwise application of the linear weight. □
The second identity
The second target lies on s+t=−1, rather than on the curve of Theorem 3.1. We determine its period and its transverse derivative separately. Write
Thus f3=F1/3 and H3=H1/3 in the notation of Section 5. The branch of each hypergeometric function is the one continued from its power series at zero to the plane cut along [1,∞).
Clausen’s identity gives H3(v)=2F1(1/6,1/3;1;v)2. Substitution of v=108z2/(1−4z)3 into the Gauss equation directly verifies that V=(1−4z)−1/22F1(1/6,1/3;1;v) satisfies (32). In particular D=(1−4z)−1H3(v) satisfies its symmetric square. Hence a local square root q of A satisfies (31). Its quadratic products with its conjugate satisfy the same third-order equation as P. The hypergeometric pullback above is the one in Rogers’ generating function for Domb numbers [6 Theorem 3.1, equation (3.4)].
It remains to determine the linear combination, including its branches. The coefficient expansion (8), analytically continued in t to a neighborhood of −1 using the positive beta integral, and the contiguous identity (16) give
P(s)=H(−1)+s[H+6θH+12θ2H]−1+O(s2).
Put
m0=21−2,f0=f(m0),f1=f′(m0).
Clausen’s identity and the differential equation for f therefore yield
which holds near p=0 with the square root equal to one; see [1 Theorem 5.6, equation (5.17)]. At p0=(2−1+i)/2 its two arguments are
u0=21+5i/2,m0,
and its squared multiplier is 1/2+i/2. The path verification in Lemma B.1 identifies this continuation with the required upper boundary value. By the quadratic form of Clausen’s identity, H3(4u(1−u))=f3(u)2, so
A(0+)=κf02,κ=21+22i.
Write q=q0+q1s1/2+q2s+O(s3/2), choosing q2=A. Differentiation of (34) gives
q02=κf02(35)
q0q1=−21+4i2+(22−2i)f0f1.(36)
For an explicit check, the arguments in this differentiation satisfy
The coefficient of s−1 in (31) gives q2=−q0/16. Using ∣κ∣=6/4, substitution into
−2(q22+q22)+26qq
gives exactly the coefficients in (33), including the zero coefficient of s1/2. The second-order equation has exponents 0,1/2 at zero and two convergent Frobenius series without logarithms. Their quadratic products have exponents 0,1/2,1, so these three coefficients uniquely determine a solution of the symmetric square. This proves (30) near zero.
For completeness, there is no hidden cut or zero in continuing the formula through 0<s<1. Write 8z=eiϕ, 0<ϕ<π. The sign of Imv is the sign of sinϕ(16cosϕ−11). Its only zero inside the interval is at x=5/16, where v=−4. Thus v never meets [1,∞). Euler’s integral for f gives 0<f1/f0<1/2, and consequently
Im(q1/q0)=2/4−f1/(2f0)>0.
Thus q and q are independent. Their Wronskian never vanishes on this interval, so q cannot vanish there. In particular ∣A∣=qq is analytic on the interval. Uniqueness for the ordinary differential equation completes the continuation. □
Hence (4θx+1)H(−1)=2L(1/2)L′(1/2). Equation (23) with λ=1/4 gives L(1/2)L′(1/2)=2/π, proving the identity. All evaluations above are of analytic functions near x=−1. □
Lemma 7.3.The classical signature-three evaluation is
(33θx+4)H3(x)∣x=4/125=2π153.(38)
Proof. We give the modular differentiation argument to specify the needed classical input. Set R(m)=f3(1−m)/f3(m). The degree-five modular equation in signature three is
(αβ)1/3+((1−α)(1−β))1/3+3{αβ(1−α)(1−β)}1/6=1,(39)
when R(β)=5R(α); see [3 (1.5)]. The unique m∈(0,1/2) with R(m)=5 forms a complementary degree-five pair with 1−m. Substitution in (39) gives
p:=m(1−m)=1251,c:=1−2m=5511.
Consider the inverse local branch β(α) through (m,1−m), for which R(β)=R(α)/5. The modular equation is symmetric, so it holds on this branch as well. Twice differentiating it gives, at this pair,
β′=1,β′′=15cp−26+60p.(40)
For an explicit check, its partial derivative in β is −5cp−2/3/6, while its second derivative in direction (1,1) is p−5/3(−13/9+10p/3). Apply Lemma 5.1 with λ=1/3 and N=5. Its formula gives
θxH3(4p)+(1+2cpβ′′)H3(4p)=πc5sin(π/3).
By (40), the coefficient in parentheses is (2/15−2p)/(1−4p)=4/33. The right side is 53/(22π), which proves (38).
Although stated there for 0≤v<1, it extends from a neighborhood of zero along v0≤v≤0, where v0=2/5−1. On this interval α(v)≤0, 0≤β(v)<1/2, and 1+v>0; thus no hypergeometric branch cut is crossed. With A(v)=4α(v)(1−α(v)) and B(v)=4β(v)(1−β(v)), squaring and using (37) gives
H3(A(v))=(1+v)2H3(B(v)).
At v=v0, exact differentiation gives
A=−4,B=1254,A′=305,B′=−125335,(1+v0)2=54.
These quantities give (42) and (43) by the chain rule. Consequently,
(15θx+4)H3(−4)=52(33θx+4)H3(4/125),
and Lemma 7.3 proves the result.
The transverse derivative and the weighted evaluation
Applying Lemma 2.1 with b=(3a−1)/(a+1) gives, for 0<a<1/3,
g2(a)=k(a)P(1−a2a),k(a)=1+3a2(1+a)1−a2.(44)
Lemma 7.5. For 0<a<1/3,
(θwG)(h2,w2)+U0g2+U1g2′=2πR2.(45)
Proof. Set E=(θwG)(h2,w2)+U0g2+U1g2′. The normal row identity (50) gives E′=(R2′/R2)E, since
R2R2′=−3a2+112a+3a+13+2(a+1)3+2(a−1)3.
Thus E/R2 is constant. At a=0, one has h2=1, w2=−1/8, U0=1/4, U1=0, and R2=1. The triple integral is analytic near this point, because its denominator is 1+∏j(1+cosvj)/8≥1 there. In particular g2′ stays bounded. Since Tn(1,1/4)=2−n(n2n), Bauer’s identity (Lemma 7.2) gives
The classical value in Lemma 7.4 is (4+15ϑ)H3(−4)=33/π. Consequently
S2=7π2405+21π1605=21π8805.
The coefficient bound Tn(22,441)≤64n gives geometric ratio 64/125<1 after cubing and dividing by 512000n. This proves absolute convergence, including the linear weight, and completes the second identity.
Exact differential certificates
This appendix gives finite certificates for Lemma 3.2, Proposition 4.1, and the corresponding second-curve equations. All operations are differentiation and arithmetic of rational functions.
Put θ=z∂z and
F(y,z)=n≥0∑Pn(y)3zn,W=θn≥0∑Pn(y)2Pn−1(y)zn.
The value assigned to P−1 does not affect W; take P−1=1. For compactness define
A=1+4yz+z2,B=2yz+z2,
C=zy{(y+z)+(4y+3z)θ+2(2y+z)θ2},
(d0,d1,d2)=−3zy(y+3z,4y+5z,2(2y+z)),
L=θ3−zy3(2θ+1)3−3z2y2(2θ+3)(θ+1)(2θ+1)+z2(θ+1)3.
Multiplication by a coefficient in these expressions is always on the left. The Legendre recurrence gives the exact identities
Thus W=RF. Write C=∑j=02cjθj, set r−1=c3=0, and put
mj=−Ar3A(θrj+rj−1)+Brj−cj(0≤j≤3).
Let M have its first three rows e1,e2,e3 and its last row (m0,m1,m2,m3), where ej is the row vector with its jth coordinate equal to one, indexed from zero. Set
Both (49) and (50) are checked by inserting (48), differentiating, and clearing denominators: all four resulting numerators vanish identically. The displayed definitions specify these checks completely and avoid large expanded connection matrices. Since EV=θG+U0Ig+U1Ig′, the second identity proves the asserted first-order equation for the normal expression. Its multiplicative constant is then fixed by the analytic boundary arguments in the text.
The continuation path
Recall that p0=(2−1+i)/2 and m0=(1−2)/2.
Lemma B.1.Continuation of (34) along p=rp0, 0≤r≤1, gives the principal value of f(m0) and the upper boundary value H3(27/2+i0).
Proof. Denote the two arguments in (34) by u(r) and m(r). The denominators do not vanish: Re(1+2p)>0 and
Re(1+p+p2)=1+22−1r(1−r)>0.
The following real polynomial checks specify the continuation explicitly. Put
Its four coefficients of degrees five through eight are positive and all other nonzero coefficients are negative. Hence N(r)≤40−292<0, proving Imu(r)>0. Finally
Only its coefficients of degrees seven through ten are negative; therefore J(r)≥2113−14892>0. Thus Reu(r)<1/2 for r<1. It follows that 4u(r)(1−u(r)) remains in the upper half-plane and approaches 27/2 from above. These signs prove all asserted branch choices. □
AI assistance
OpenAI ChatGPT/Codex (GPT-6-astra) assisted with symbolic calculations, literature checks. The main ideas were from the author. ChatGPT Astra pro assistance also included the developing of transverse derivative method. The October 2026 revisions used GPT-6 Astra Pro. Responsibility for the mathematical claims, references, and final text rests with the author.
References
[1]B. C. Berndt, S. Bhargava, and F. G. Garvan, Ramanujan’s theories of elliptic functions to alternative bases, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 347 (1995), no. 11, 4163–4244. doi:10.1090/S0002-9947-1995-1311903-0.DOI
[2]NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions, https://dlmf.nist.gov/; accessed 29 October 2026.
[3]H. H. Chan and W.-C. Liaw, On Russell-type modular equations, Canad. J. Math. 52 (2000), no. 1, 31–46. doi:10.4153/CJM-2000-002-0.DOI
[4]M. van Hoeij, D. van Straten, and W. Zudilin, A hyperelliptic saga on a generating function of the squares of Legendre polynomials, Journal of Experimental Mathematics 1 (2025), no. 2, 278–305. doi:10.5699/JXL.001.002.005.
[5]S. Ramanujan, Modular equations and approximations to π, Quart. J. Math. 45 (1914), 350–372. https://ramanujan.sirnudi.org/Volumes/published/ram06.pdf.
[6]M. D. Rogers, New 5F4 hypergeometric transformations, three-variable Mahler measures, and formulas for 1/π, Ramanujan J. 18 (2009), no. 3, 327–340. doi:10.1007/s11139-007-9040-x.
[7]Z.-W. Sun, On sums related to central binomial and trinomial coefficients, in M. B. Nathanson (ed.), Combinatorial and Additive Number Theory: CANT 2011 and 2012, Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics 101, Springer, New York, 2014, 257–312. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-1601-6_18.DOI
[8]Z.-W. Sun, New series for powers of π and related congruences, Electron. Res. Arch. 28 (2020), no. 3, 1273–1342. doi:10.3934/era.2020070.DOI
[9]Z.-W. Sun, List of conjectural series for powers of π and other constants, arXiv:1102.5649v47, 29 December 2014.arxiv.org/abs/1102.5649
[10]J. G. Wan, Series for 1/π using Legendre’s relation, Integral Transforms Spec. Funct. 25 (2014), no. 1, 1–14. doi:10.1080/10652469.2013.809072.DOI
[11]W. Zudilin, A generating function of the squares of Legendre polynomials, Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 89 (2014), no. 1, 125–131. doi:10.1017/S0004972713000233.DOI