Introduction

Let Ω(n)\Omega(n) be the number of prime factors of nn, counted with multiplicity, and let ω(n)\omega(n) count its distinct prime factors. We prove the following affirmative answer to the parity question for predecessors of primes.

Theorem 1.1. There are infinitely many primes pp such that p−1p-1 is squarefree and Ω(p−1)\Omega(p-1) is even. In particular, there are infinitely many such primes under either convention for counting prime factors.

The squarefreeness condition is useful rather than cosmetic: it removes the ambiguity between the two counting conventions. Writing p=2u+1p=2u+1, we will construct nonnegative weights on odd integers uu for which Ω(u)\Omega(u) is odd. These weights have enough bilinear distribution to detect prime values of 2u+12u+1, and their nonsquarefree part is negligible at the scale of the detected prime mass.

Relation to earlier work. Prime-factor parity is a classical obstruction in sieve theory: congruence information alone need not distinguish the two Liouville signs. The role of additional bilinear information is illustrated by the asymptotic sieve of Friedlander and Iwaniec [2], Section 1. Work on smooth shifted primes, including Baker and Harman [1] and Lichtman [3], provides related context for imposing multiplicative restrictions on a prime’s predecessor. The parity condition here is a different restriction; we do not deduce it from smoothness alone.

Our structural inputs are the dilation-graph transference, ideal-kernel, weighted-sieve, and proxy estimates of the companion paper Weighted dilation graphs, smooth shifted primes and totient fibers [4], hereafter S. Their hypotheses and the conclusions needed here are stated where they enter the proof. We do not reprove those results.

S’s shifted-correlation argument uses a rough integer in a designated long factor slot and unsigned marked weights. Neither smoothness of the predecessor nor that unsigned statement gives the parity conclusion of Theorem 1.1. The new work is to permit a prime in the long slot and the same group-supported Liouville sign at both endpoints. We prove both extensions here.

The two analytic extensions. First, a logarithmic-phase estimate gives arbitrary fixed logarithmic cancellation in a prime Dirichlet polynomial of positive-power length at all sufficiently large logarithmic heights up to x2x^2. A quantitative power-sum iteration supplies the weak high-height zero-free strip needed for this estimate. The growing degree and all its constants are kept explicit enough for the application.

Second, the sign of a shared dilation occurs twice in a lifted correlation and cancels by complete multiplicativity. This observation allows the graph reduction to retain a parity-sensitive weight. The comparison terms are controlled by local Fourier energy: a small-prime factor restricts difficult frequencies to a sparse set, the new prime estimate treats its large frequencies, and a prescribed character–Mellin discrepancy treats its small frequencies. The resulting correlation estimate implies a Type II theorem for the nonnegative parity-selecting weight.

The common-sign cancellation and the prime-slot estimate are stated separately, so their use is not tied to the final sieve. In the extraction argument, ordinary congruence distribution handles the initial sieve; the stronger Type II statement justifies replacing prime and roughness indicators by bounded local-density proxies. An upper bound for balanced semiprimes then leaves positive prime mass.

Organization. Section 2 fixes conventions and records the classical inputs. Section 3 proves the prime-polynomial estimate, Lemma 3.1, and Section 4 proves the twisted correlation, Theorem 4.1. Section 5 constructs the weights. Their Type II and congruence distribution are Theorems 6.1 and 7.1, proved in Sections 6 and 7. Section 8 extracts the required primes. All auxiliary constants are fixed before xx tends to infinity; in particular, the final proxy precision is chosen only after the required discrepancy exponent. We make this order explicit at the steps where it matters.

Conventions and classical estimates

Throughout the proof,

x→∞,L=log⁡x,T=log⁡L,W=exp⁡(L),e(t)=exp⁡(2πit).x \to\infty,\qquad L = \log x,\qquad T = \log L,\qquad W = \exp(\sqrt{L}),\qquad e(t) = \exp(2\pi i t).

A logarithmic power always has a fixed exponent, chosen before xx tends to infinity. The implied constants may depend on all previously fixed parameters. No effective threshold for xx is asserted. The letters pp and qq in explicitly indicated prime sums range over primes; general factorization variables are positive integers. We put P−(1)=∞P^{-}(1) = \infty, where P−(n)P^{-}(n) is the least prime factor of n>1n > 1, and write τ(n)\tau(n) for its divisor function. The notation n≍Yn \asymp Y restricts nn to a fixed constant enlargement of a dyad [Y,2Y)[Y, 2Y). All such enlargements remain bounded independently of xx. Dirichlet characters are extended by zero on nonunits.

We use the following classical estimates in the forms recorded in S [4], Section 2. This explicit list fixes their uniformity; it does not require any distribution theorem beyond the stated ranges.

Proposition 2.1 (Prime estimates). The prime number theorem holds with an error smaller than every fixed negative logarithmic power. Mertens’ estimates give

∑p≤y1p=log⁡log⁡y+O(1),∏p≤y(1−1p)∼e−γElog⁡y.\sum_{p \le y} \frac{1}{p} = \log\log y + O(1),\qquad\prod_{p \le y}\left(1-\frac{1}{p}\right) \sim\frac{e^{-\gamma_E}}{\log y}.

where γE\gamma_E is Euler’s constant. For fixed A,C>0A,C > 0, uniformly for r≤(log⁡y)Cr \le(\log y)^C and (a,r)=1(a,r) = 1, the Siegel–Walfisz estimate is

#{p≤y:p≡a(modr)}=Li⁡(y)φ(r)+OA,C(y(log⁡y)A).\#\{p \le y : p \equiv a \pmod r\} = \frac{\operatorname{Li}(y)}{\varphi(r)} + O_{A,C}\left(\frac{y}{(\log y)^A}\right).

Its constants need not be effective.

All short intervals used with the prime number theorem have either a fixed logarithmic-length interpretation in a fixed positive-power band, or relative length a fixed negative power of LL; the absolute error above is made sufficiently small before taking their differences. We never assume a relative prime asymptotic on every arbitrarily short interval.

Proposition 2.2 (Large sieve and moment bounds). For arbitrary coefficients supported on the integers of an interval of length HH,

∑r≤Rrφ(r)∑χmodrχ mod r∗∣∑nanχ(n)∣2≪(H+1+R2)∑n∣an∣2.\sum_{r \le R} \frac{r}{\varphi(r)} \sum_{\substack{\chi\bmod r \\ \chi\ \text{mod }r}}^{*} \left|\sum_n a_n\chi(n)\right|^2 \ll(H+1+R^2)\sum_n |a_n|^2.

The asterisk denotes primitive characters. For every fixed integer k≥0k \ge0 there is CkC_k such that

∑n≤Yτ(n)k≪kY(log⁡(2Y))Ck,∑n≤Yτ(n)kn≪k(log⁡(2Y))Ck.\sum_{n \le Y} \tau(n)^k \ll_k Y(\log(2Y))^{C_k}, \qquad\sum_{n \le Y} \frac{\tau(n)^k}{n} \ll_k (\log(2Y))^{C_k}.

If P(t)=∑n≤YcnnitP(t)=\sum_{n \le Y}c_n n^{it}, then on any real interval II of length HH,

∫I∣P(t)∣2 dt≪(H+Ylog⁡(2Y))∑n∣cn∣2.\int_I |P(t)|^2\,dt \ll(H+Y\log(2Y))\sum_n |c_n|^2.

For a set T⊂I\mathcal{T}\subset I with mutual spacing at least one,

∑t∈T∣P(t)∣2≪(H+1+Ylog⁡(2Y))(log⁡(2Y))2∑n∣cn∣2.\sum_{t\in\mathcal{T}} |P(t)|^2 \ll(H+1+Y\log(2Y))(\log(2Y))^2\sum_n |c_n|^2.

The constants in the last two estimates are absolute, independently of how the coefficients were formed.

These are Theorem 2.3 and Lemmas 2.5–2.6 of S. In particular, the fixed-moment estimate applies to a convolution of a fixed number of logarithmically bounded sequences, giving coefficient-square mass ULO(1)U L^{O(1)} on a dyad of size UU. With reciprocal-index normalization the bound is LO(1)/UL^{O(1)}/U. For the one growing power used later, we instead prove a factorial coefficient bound and use the coefficient-independent mean-square inequality.

Proposition 2.3 (Derivative tests). Let ff be real-valued on an interval containing HH consecutive integers. If f′f' is monotone and remains in [j+λ,j+1−λ][j+\lambda,j+1-\lambda] for an integer jj and 0<λ≤1/20<\lambda\le1/2, then

∑ne(f(n))≪λ−1.\sum_n \mathrm{e}(f(n)) \ll\lambda^{-1}.

If instead ff is twice continuously differentiable and λ≤∣f′′∣≤Cλ\lambda\le|f''|\le C\lambda throughout the interval, then

∑ne(f(n))≪CHλ+λ−1/2.\sum_n \mathrm{e}(f(n)) \ll_C H\sqrt{\lambda}+\lambda^{-1/2}.

Both estimates apply on every subinterval satisfying their hypotheses.

This is the form of S, Lemma 2.7. The distance from integers in the first test is part of the hypothesis, not merely a lower bound on the absolute derivative.

We will repeatedly separate smooth functions in logarithmic coordinates. The following elementary version of S, Lemma 2.8, explains the order in which frequency cutoffs and accuracies may be chosen.

Lemma 2.4 (Smooth separation). Let FF be smooth and supported on a fixed bounded box in Rb\mathbb{R}^{b}, with bb fixed. Suppose all derivatives of order jj are bounded by CjLC(j+1)C_jL^{C(j+1)}. Fourier inversion separates its variables with integrated absolute coefficient mass LO(1)L^{O(1)}. There is a fixed exponent C′>0C' > 0, depending on b,Cb,C, such that truncating each frequency at LC′L^{C'} makes an error OA(L−A)O_A(L^{-A}) for every fixed A>0A > 0. The exponent C′C' is fixed before AA.

Proof. Integration by parts gives, for each fixed jj, an integrable tail bounded by a constant times LC(j+1)(1+∣ξ∣)−jL^{C(j+1)}(1+|\xi|)^{-j}. Using a fixed j>bj>b first bounds the full integral by a fixed logarithmic power. Outside ∣ξ∣≥LC′|\xi| \ge L^{C'} the same calculation gives

Oj(LC(j+1)−C′(j−b)).O_j\left(L^{C(j+1)-C'(j-b)}\right).

Fix C′>CC' > C and then increase jj for any prescribed AA. The Fourier phase factors into one-dimensional phases. Applied to normalized logarithmic coordinates, these are multiplicative power twists.

The fixed-dimension condition in Lemma 2.4 will not be used with a growing-dimensional box. In the allocation argument there are O(T)O(T) separate one-dimensional transitions, each with a fixed Fourier integral norm. Their product costs only exp⁡(O(T))=LO(1)\exp(O(T))=L^{O(1)}; a telescoping estimate controls their combined tails.

The weighted block sieve and local-density proxies are stated in the prime-extraction section, where their particular coefficient bounds and precision dependence are needed. The generic dilation-graph results are likewise stated at their application in the shifted correlation section. These are the only nonclassical imported ingredients of the proof.

A long prime polynomial

The correlation argument will require cancellation in a prime polynomial at frequencies as large as x2x^2. We prove the required estimate here, including the dependence on a growing degree in the elementary mean-value argument. Throughout this section, L=log⁡xL=\log x and T=log⁡LT=\log L.

Lemma 3.1 (Long prime polynomial). Fix 0<τ<η<10<\tau<\eta<1, C>0C>0, and A>0A>0. There is a constant B0=B0(τ,η,C,A)B_0=B_0(\tau,\eta,C,A) such that, uniformly for

xτ2≤N≤xη,q≤LC,LB0≤∣t∣≤x2,\frac{x^\tau}{2}\le N\le x^\eta,\qquad q\le L^C,\qquad L^{B_0}\le|t|\le x^2,

every Dirichlet character χ\chi modulo qq and every interval I⊂[N,2N]I\subset[N,2N] satisfy

∣∑p∈Iχ(p)p−1+it∣≪τ,η,C,AL−A.\left|\sum_{p\in I}\chi(p)p^{-1+it}\right|\ll_{\tau,\eta,C,A}L^{-A}.

The proof proceeds from a quantitative power-sum estimate to cancellation for a logarithmic phase, then to a high-height zero-free strip, and finally to primes by Mellin inversion. We first establish a power-sum estimate with sufficient uniformity in its degree. For integers k≥2k\ge2, s≥1s\ge1, and M≥1M\ge1, let Js,k(M)J_{s,k}(M) count the solutions of

∑i=1suij=∑i=1svij(1≤j≤k),1≤ui,vi≤M.\sum_{i=1}^{s}u_i^j=\sum_{i=1}^{s}v_i^j\quad(1\le j\le k),\qquad1\le u_i,v_i\le M.

Writing K=k(k+1)/2K=k(k+1)/2 and

f(α)=∑n=1Me(∑j=1kαjnj)f(\boldsymbol{\alpha})=\sum_{n=1}^{M}\mathrm{e}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{k}\alpha_j n^j\right)

orthogonality gives Js,k(M)=∫[0,1]k∣f(α)∣2s dαJ_{s,k}(M)=\int_{[0,1]^k}|f(\boldsymbol{\alpha})|^{2s}\,\mathrm{d}\boldsymbol{\alpha}. The argument uses the classical Vinogradov mean-value method in Linnik’s pp-adic form; see Wooley [5], Section 2, pp. 1583–1585 for an exposition. We derive the required degree-uniform quantitative estimate below, without invoking the modern efficient-congruencing theorem of that paper.

Lemma 3.2 (A quantitative power-sum bound). There are absolute constants C1,C2>0C_1,C_2>0 such that, for every integer k≥2k\ge2, some integer ss with k≤s≤C1k4k\le s\le C_1k^4 satisfies

Js,k(M)≤exp⁡(C1kC2)M2s−K+1/100(M≥1).J_{s,k}(M)\le\exp(C_1k^{C_2})M^{2s-K+1/100}\qquad(M\ge1).

Proof. We iterate estimates

Js,k(M)≤CsMEs,Es=2s−K+ϵs,J_{s,k}(M)\le C_sM^{E_s},\qquad E_s=2s-K+\epsilon_s,

starting with s=ks=k, Ck=1C_k=1, and ϵk=K\epsilon_k=K. The iteration sends ss to s+ks+k and ϵs\epsilon_s to (1−1/k)ϵs(1-1/k)\epsilon_s.

Choose a sufficiently large absolute constant A1A_1. If M1/k<A1k6M^{1/k}<A_1k^6, then log⁡M≪klog⁡(2k)\log M\ll k\log(2k), and the trivial bound Ju,k(M)≤M2uJ_{u,k}(M)\le M^{2u} costs at most

MK≤exp⁡(O(k3log⁡(2k)))M^K\le\exp(O(k^3\log(2k)))

relative to every proposed estimate with exponent 2u−K+ϵ2u-K+\epsilon, ϵ≥0\epsilon\ge0. Thus it suffices to treat M1/k≥A1k6M^{1/k}\ge A_1k^6. The prime number theorem in Proposition 2.1, after enlarging A1A_1, supplies a fixed list of 2k3+52k^3+5 primes rr in [M1/k,2M1/k][M^{1/k},2M^{1/k}], all greater than kk.

At moment s+ks+k, call a tuple degenerate if it has fewer than kk distinct coordinates. There are at most ks+kMk−1k^{s+k}M^{k-1} such tuples. If GG is their exponential sum, its contribution on one side of the equations is at most

∫[0,1]k∣G∣∣f∣s+k≤ks+kMk−1Js+k,k(M)1/2.\int_{[0,1]^k}|G||f|^{s+k}\le k^{s+k}M^{k-1}J_{s+k,k}(M)^{1/2}.

The contribution with a degenerate tuple on either side is therefore at most twice this quantity.

For a nondegenerate solution, select kk distinct coordinates on each side and permute them to the first kk positions. This costs at most (s+k)2k(s+k)^{2k}. The product of the two Vandermonde products is a nonzero integer of absolute value at most Mk(k−1)M^{k(k-1)}. Fewer than k2(k−1)+1k^2(k-1)+1 primes of size at least M1/kM^{1/k} can divide it. Hence some prime rr in our list makes these first kk coordinates distinct modulo rr on each side.

For such a prime put

Fr(α)=∑1≤z1,…,zk≤Mzi≢zj(modr) (i≠j)e(∑j=1kαj∑i=1kzij).F_r(\boldsymbol{\alpha})= \sum_{\substack{1\le z_1,\ldots,z_k\le M\\ z_i\not\equiv z_j\pmod r\ (i\ne j)}} \mathrm{e}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{k}\alpha_j\sum_{i=1}^{k}z_i^j\right).

The relevant number of solutions is bounded by

(s+k)2k∑r∫[0,1]k∣Fr∣2∣f∣2s.(s+k)^{2k}\sum_r\int_{[0,1]^k}|F_r|^2|f|^{2s}.

The integrands are nonnegative. Write f=∑a mod rfaf=\sum_{a\ \mathrm{mod}\ r} f_a, where faf_a is restricted to n≡a(modr)n\equiv a\pmod r. Hölder’s inequality gives

∣f∣2s≤r2s−1∑a mod r∣fa∣2s.|f|^{2s}\le r^{2s-1}\sum_{a\ \mathrm{mod}\ r}|f_a|^{2s}.

Fix aa. In the system counted by ∣Fr∣2∣fa∣2s|F_r|^2|f_a|^{2s}, translate all variables by −a-a. Translation preserves the equations for the first kk powers by the binomial formula. The remaining ss variables on either side are multiples of rr, so the first lists z,z′z,z' obey

∑i=1kzij≡∑i=1k(zi′)j(modrj)(1≤j≤k).(1)\sum_{i=1}^{k}z_i^j\equiv\sum_{i=1}^{k}(z_i')^j\pmod{r^j}\qquad(1\le j\le k). \tag*{(1)}

There are at most MkM^k choices for the first list. For each such list, there are at most k!rK−kk!r^{K-k} choices for the second. To see this, lift the prescribed jjth sum modulo rjr^j to a residue modulo rkr^k. The number of choices for all lifts is ∏j=1krk−j=rK−k\prod_{j=1}^{k}r^{k-j}=r^{K-k}. For each full vector of sums modulo rkr^k, Newton’s identities determine the multiset of roots modulo rr, since r>kr>k. There are at most k!k! orderings. The Jacobian of the power sums has determinant

k!∏i<j(zj′−zi′),k!\prod_{i<j}(z'_j-z'_i),

up to sign, and is invertible modulo rr. Each ordering therefore lifts uniquely from modulus rr to modulus rkr^k: at each stage the next digits are the unique solution of the corresponding linear system modulo rr. Finally, an interval of MM integers contains at most one representative of any residue modulo rkr^k, because M≤rkM\le r^k.

After both first lists are fixed, divide the remaining variables by rr. They range over a common interval of at most ⌈M/r⌉\lceil M/r\rceil integers and have prescribed differences of power sums. Translation to an initial interval changes only these prescribed differences. The count is a Fourier coefficient of the nonnegative function ∣f∣2s|f|^{2s} at that shorter length, and consequently is at most Js,k(⌈M/r⌉)J_{s,k}(\lceil M/r\rceil). Summing over aa accounts for the final factor rr, and gives

Js+k,k(M)≤2ks+kMk−1Js+k,k(M)1/2+(s+k)2k(2k3+5)k!max⁡rr2s+K−kMkJs,k(⌈M/r⌉).(2)J_{s+k,k}(M)\le2k^{s+k}M^{k-1}J_{s+k,k}(M)^{1/2} +(s+k)^{2k}(2k^3+5)k!\max_r r^{2s+K-k}M^kJ_{s,k}(\lceil M/r\rceil). \tag*{(2)}

Insert (3.3). Since Es≥0E_s\ge0, rounding costs at most 2Es2^{E_s}, and the exponent of rr becomes

2s+K−k−Es=k2−ϵs≥0.2s+K-k-E_s=k^2-\epsilon_s\ge0.

Replacing rr by at most 2M1/k2M^{1/k} therefore gives the exponent

k+Es+k2−ϵsk=2(s+k)−K+(1−1/k)ϵs.k+E_s+\frac{k^2-\epsilon_s}{k}=2(s+k)-K+(1-1/k)\epsilon_s.

The inequality J≤aJ+bJ\le a\sqrt{J}+b implies J≤2a2+2bJ\le2a^2+2b. The exponent 2k−22k-2 from a2a^2 is admissible: the target exponent starts at 2k2k, and at each step its increase is 2k−ϵs/k≥2k−K/k>02k-\epsilon_s/k\ge2k-K/k>0. Thus the asserted iteration holds. Its constants can be chosen with

log⁡Cs+k≤log⁡(1+Cs)+O((s+k)log⁡(2k)+klog⁡(s+k)+k3log⁡(2k)),\log C_{s+k}\le\log(1+C_s)+O\bigl((s+k)\log(2k)+k\log(s+k)+k^3\log(2k)\bigr),

including (3.4). After O(klog⁡(2k))O(k\log(2k)) steps, ϵs=K(1−1/k)(s−k)/k≤1/100\epsilon_s=K(1-1/k)^{(s-k)/k}\le1/100. Then s=O(k2log⁡(2k))≤C1k4s=O(k^2\log(2k))\le C_1k^4, and summing the displayed costs gives log⁡Cs≤C1kC2\log C_s\le C_1k^{C_2} for absolute constants. Increasing the exponent from ϵs\epsilon_s to 1/1001/100 proves the Lemma.

Lemma 3.3 (A logarithmic phase on progressions). Fix C>0C > 0. There is an absolute constant C3>0C_3 > 0 such that, for sufficiently large xx in terms of CC, the following holds uniformly:

exp⁡(L/T2)≤N′≤2x5,q≤LC,exp⁡(L/(2T2))≤∣v∣≤4x3.\exp(L/T^2) \le N' \le2x^5,\qquad q \le L^C,\qquad\exp(L/(2T^2)) \le|v| \le4x^3.

For every residue aa (mod qq) and every interval I⊂[N′,2N′]\mathcal{I} \subset[N',2N']*,

∣∑n∈In≡a(modq)niv∣≪N′qexp⁡(−L/TC3).(3)\left|\sum_{\substack{n\in\mathcal{I}\\ n\equiv a\pmod q}}n^{iv}\right|\ll\frac{N'}{q}\exp(-L/T^{C_3}). \tag*{(3)}

Proof. Put H=N′/qH=N'/q and y=log⁡∣v∣/log⁡Hy=\log|v|/\log H. Then

log⁡H≥L/T2−CT≫L/T2,y≪T2.\log H\ge L/T^2-CT\gg L/T^2,\qquad y\ll T^2.

Writing n=q(b+a/q)n=q(b+a/q), with 0≤a<q0\le a<q, reduces the sum, up to a factor of modulus one, to ∑b∈I(b+a/q)iv\sum_{b\in\mathcal{I}}(b+a/q)^{iv}, where I\mathcal{I} is an interval of integers and H≤b+a/q≤2HH\le b+a/q\le2H.

If y<4/5y<4/5, the derivative of vlog⁡(b+a/q)/(2π)v\log(b+a/q)/(2\pi) is monotone, has magnitude comparable to ∣v∣/H|v|/H, and has magnitude less than 1/21/2. The monotone first derivative estimate in Proposition 2.3 therefore bounds the sum by O(H/∣v∣)O(H/|v|). The lower bound on ∣v∣|v| makes this smaller than (3).

Suppose now that y≥4/5y\ge4/5. Set

M=⌊H3/4⌋,k=⌈4y+8⌉.M=\lfloor H^{3/4}\rfloor,\qquad k=\lceil4y+8\rceil.

Averaging the sum over forward shifts 1≤h≤M1\le h\le M changes it by O(M)O(M): a shift changes an interval at only O(h)O(h) endpoints. For b∈Ib\in\mathcal{I}, Taylor expansion gives

v2πlog⁡(b+h+a/q)=v2πlog⁡(b+a/q)+∑j=1kαj(b)hj+O(H−2),αj(b)=(−1)j−1v2πj(b+a/q)j.\frac{v}{2\pi}\log(b+h+a/q)=\frac{v}{2\pi}\log(b+a/q)+\sum_{j=1}^{k}\alpha_j(b)h^j+O(H^{-2}),\qquad\alpha_j(b)=\frac{(-1)^{j-1}v}{2\pi j(b+a/q)^j}.

Indeed the remainder is O(∣v∣(M/H)k+1)=O(Hy−(k+1)/4)=O(H−9/4)O(|v|(M/H)^{k+1})=O(H^{y-(k+1)/4})=O(H^{-9/4}), uniformly even as kk grows. Thus, with

S(α)=∑h=1Mexp⁡(∑j=1kαjhj),S(\boldsymbol{\alpha})=\sum_{h=1}^{M}\exp\left(\sum_{j=1}^{k}\alpha_jh^j\right),

the original sum is bounded by

1M∑b∈I∣S(α(b))∣+O(M+H−1).(4)\frac{1}{M}\sum_{b\in\mathcal{I}}|S(\boldsymbol{\alpha}(b))|+O(M+H^{-1}). \tag*{(4)}

Partition the coefficient torus [0,1)k[0,1)^k into boxes with side length M−jM^{-j} in coordinate jj. Each box contains at most

exp⁡(O(k))H4/5\exp(O(k))H^{4/5}

of the vectors α(b)\boldsymbol{\alpha}(b) (mod 1). For this it suffices to use the coordinate j=⌈y+3/20⌉j=\lceil y+3/20\rceil, which lies between 1 and kk. Before reduction modulo one, this coordinate has magnitude O(H−3/20)O(H^{-3/20}), is monotone, and has derivative of magnitude at least

∣v∣2π(2H)j+1≥exp⁡(−O(k))Hy−j−1.\frac{|v|}{2\pi(2H)^{j+1}}\ge\exp(-O(k))H^{y-j-1}.

A coordinate interval of length M−jM-j on the torus pulls back to at most two intervals in bb. Their total length is at most exp⁡(O(k))H1+j/4−y\exp(O(k))H^{1+j/4-y}. Here the floor in MM costs exp⁡(O(k))\exp(O(k)), while

y−j4≥3y4−2380≥516>15.y-\frac{j}{4}\geq\frac{3y}{4}-\frac{23}{80}\geq\frac{5}{16}>\frac{1}{5}.

Counting integer points proves (3.10).

Let ss be supplied by Lemma 3.2. We also need the following bound for suprema over boxes QQ:

∑Qsup⁡α∈Q∣S(α)∣2s≤exp⁡(O(sk+k))MKJs,k(M).(5)\sum_Q \sup_{\alpha\in Q}|S(\alpha)|^{2s}\leq\exp(O(sk+k))M^KJ_{s,k}(M). \tag*{(5)}

To prove it, rescale each box to [0,1]k[0,1]^k. Iterating the one-dimensional fundamental theorem of calculus gives, for any smooth function FF on that cube,

sup⁡∣F∣≤∑ϵ∈{0,1}k∫[0,1]k∣∂ϵF∣.\sup|F|\leq\sum_{\epsilon\in\{0,1\}^k}\int_{[0,1]^k}|\partial^\epsilon F|.

Hölder’s inequality bounds the 2s2sth power of the right-hand side by 2k(2s−1)2^{k(2s-1)} times the sum of the corresponding 2s2sth moments. For the rescaled SS, every mixed derivative has coefficients bounded in modulus by (2π)k(2\pi)^k: each differentiation in coordinate jj introduces the factor 2πihj/Mj2\pi i h_j/M_j. On summing over the boxes, change of variables contributes MKM^K. Orthogonality then bounds the full-torus moment of every such derivative by (2π)2skJs,k(M)(2\pi)^{2sk}J_{s,k}(M). This proves (3.11), with constants controlled at the growing degree.

Apply Hölder’s inequality to the sum in (3.9), and use (3.10), (3.11), and (3.2). Since ∣I∣≪H|\mathcal{I}|\ll H, the result is

1M∑b∈I∣S(α(b))∣≪H(exp⁡(O(kC4))H−1/5M1/100)1/(2s)(6)\frac{1}{M}\sum_{b\in\mathcal{I}}|S(\alpha(b))|\ll H\left(\exp(O(k^{C_4}))H^{-1/5}M^{1/100}\right)^{1/(2s)} \tag*{(6)}

for an absolute constant C4C_4. We have k≪T2k\ll T^2 and s≪T8s\ll T^8, whereas

−15log⁡H+1100log⁡M≤−77400log⁡H.-\frac{1}{5}\log H+\frac{1}{100}\log M\leq-\frac{77}{400}\log H.

Every fixed power of TT is o(L/T2)o(L/T^2). Thus the right-hand side of (3.12) is at most Hexp⁡(−c1L/T10)H\exp(-c_1L/T^{10}) for some absolute c1>0c_1>0, once xx is sufficiently large. The errors in (3.9) are smaller. Increasing a fixed exponent C3>10C_3>10 absorbs c1c_1 and proves the Lemma. □

We write D(s,χ)D(s,\chi) for the Dirichlet LL-function, to distinguish it from L=log⁡xL=\log x. Characters need not be primitive. Periodicity gives ∑n≤uχ(n)=cχu+O(q)\sum_{n\leq u}\chi(n)=c_\chi u+O(q), where cχ=q−1∑a mod qχ(a)c_\chi=q^{-1}\sum_{a\bmod q}\chi(a). Partial summation therefore continues D(s,χ)D(s,\chi) meromorphically to Re⁡s>0\operatorname{Re}s>0, with only the possible simple pole at s=1s=1, and gives, for σ=Re⁡s\sigma=\operatorname{Re}s in a fixed compact subinterval of (0,∞)(0,\infty),

D(s,χ)=∑n≤Yχ(n)ns+cχY1−ss−1+O(q(1+∣s∣)Y−σ).(7)D(s,\chi)=\sum_{n\leq Y}\frac{\chi(n)}{n^s}+\frac{c_\chi Y^{1-s}}{s-1}+O\left(q(1+|s|)Y^{-\sigma}\right). \tag*{(7)}

Lemma 3.4 (A bound near the line Re⁡s=1\operatorname{Re}s=1). Fix C>0C>0 and put r∗=T4/Lr_* = T^4/L. Uniformly for q≤LCq\leq L^C,

log⁡∣D(σ+iv,χ)∣≪CT2(∣σ−1∣≤10r∗, 12≤∣v∣≤3x3).(8)\log|D(\sigma+iv,\chi)|\ll_C T^2\left(|\sigma-1|\leq10r_*,\ \frac{1}{2}\leq|v|\leq3x^3\right). \tag*{(8)}

Proof. First suppose ∣v∣≤exp⁡(L/(2T2))|v| \le\exp(L/(2T^2)), and use Y=exp⁡(2L/T2)Y = \exp(2L/T^2) in (3.13). Absolute summation gives

∑n≤Yn−σ≪(1+log⁡Y)max⁡(1,Y1−σ)≤exp⁡(O(T2)).\sum_{n \le Y} n^{-\sigma} \ll(1+\log Y)\max(1,Y^{1-\sigma}) \le\exp(O(T^2)).

Since ∣s−1∣≥1/2|s-1| \ge1/2, the pole term has the same bound. The error is at most

exp⁡(−3L2T2+O(T2+CT)),\exp\left(-\frac{3L}{2T^2}+O(T^2+CT)\right),

and hence is negligible.

For exp⁡(L/(2T2))<∣v∣≤3x3\exp(L/(2T^2)) < |v| \le3x^3, take Y=x5Y=x^5. The terms with n≤exp⁡(L/T2)n \le\exp(L/T^2) again contribute exp⁡(O(T2))\exp(O(T^2)) in absolute value. On a dyadic interval above this threshold, sum (3.7), with phase −v-v, over the residue classes modulo qq, including their character coefficients. The factors qq and 1/q1/q cancel. Partial summation with n−σn^{-\sigma} bounds that dyad by

exp⁡(−L/TC3)exp⁡(O(T4)).\exp(-L/T^{C_3})\exp(O(T^4)).

There are O(L)O(L) dyads, and the same bound applies to a final partial dyad. Their total is negligible, since L/TC3L/T^{C_3} exceeds every fixed power of TT. Finally, the pole term and remainder in (3.13) are bounded respectively by

exp⁡(−L2T2+O(T4)),exp⁡(−2L+O(T4+CT)).\exp\left(-\frac{L}{2T^2}+O(T^4)\right), \qquad\exp(-2L+O(T^4+CT)).

This proves (3.14).

Lemma 3.5 (Local logarithmic derivative). Fix C>0C>0, let q≤LCq \le L^C, and put s0=1+r∗+ivs_0=1+r_*+iv, where 1≤∣v∣≤52x31 \le|v| \le\frac{5}{2}x^3. There is a radius RR with 4r∗≤R≤5r∗4r_* \le R \le5r_*, with no zero on its boundary, for which

D′D(s,χ)=∑∣ρ−s0∣<R1s−ρ+OC(T2/r∗)(∣s−s0∣≤2r∗),(9)\frac{D'}{D}(s,\chi)=\sum_{|\rho-s_0|<R}\frac{1}{s-\rho}+O_C(T^2/r_*) \qquad(|s-s_0|\le2r_*), \tag*{(9)}

away from zeros. The sum counts zeros with multiplicity and has OC(T2)O_C(T^2) terms.

Proof. For large xx, the disk ∣s−s0∣≤8r∗|s-s_0| \le8r_* avoids the possible pole at s=1s=1 and lies in the region of Lemma 3.4. At its center the Euler product gives

∣D(s0,χ)∣≥∏p(1+p−1−r∗)−1=ζ(2+2r∗)ζ(1+r∗)≫r∗.|D(s_0,\chi)| \ge\prod_p(1+p^{-1-r_*})^{-1}=\frac{\zeta(2+2r_*)}{\zeta(1+r_*)}\gg r_*.

Thus log⁡∣D(s0,χ)∣≥−O(T)\log|D(s_0,\chi)| \ge-O(T). Jensen’s formula, using the radius 8r∗8r_* and the upper bound OC(T2)O_C(T^2), shows that the disk of radius 5r∗5r_* contains OC(T2)O_C(T^2) zeros. Choose R∈[4r∗,5r∗]R \in[4r_*,5r_*] so that none lies on its boundary.

Use centered coordinates z=s−s0z=s-s_0, and write a=ρ−s0a=\rho-s_0 for each zero in ∣z∣<R|z|<R. Divide D(s0+z,χ)D(s_0+z,\chi) by the disk Blaschke factors

Ba(z)=R(z−a)R2−aˉz,B_a(z)=\frac{R(z-a)}{R^2-\bar{a}z},

repeated with multiplicity. The quotient GG is holomorphic and nonvanishing on the closed disk, and has the same boundary modulus as DD. Maximum modulus gives log⁡∣G∣≤M0\log|G| \le M_0 throughout the disk for some M0=OC(T2)M_0=O_C(T^2). Since ∣Ba(0)∣<1|B_a(0)|<1, log⁡∣G(0)∣≥−O(T)\log|G(0)| \ge-O(T).

Let hh be an analytic logarithm of GG. The positive harmonic function M0−Re⁡hM_0-\operatorname{Re}h has value OC(T2)O_C(T^2) at the center. The Poisson formula, or its derivative together with Harnack’s inequality on concentric disks, gives

∣h′(z)∣≪CT2/r∗(∣z∣≤2r∗).|h'(z)| \ll_C T^2/r_\ast\qquad(|z|\le2r_\ast).

Restoring the factors uses

Ba′Ba(z)=1z−a+a‾R2−a‾z.\frac{B_a'}{B_a}(z)=\frac{1}{z-a}+\frac{\overline{a}}{R^2-\overline{a}z}.

The second term is O(1/r∗)O(1/r_\ast) on ∣z∣≤2r∗|z|\le2r_\ast, uniformly in ∣a∣<R|a|<R. There are OC(T2)O_C(T^2) such terms, giving exactly (3.15).

Lemma 3.6 (A zero-free strip at large height). For each fixed C>0C>0 there is c=c(C)>0c=c(C)>0 such that every character of modulus at most LCL^C has no zero in

Re⁡s≥1−cT2/L,1≤∣Im⁡s∣≤x3.\operatorname{Re}s\ge1-cT^2/L,\qquad1\le|\operatorname{Im}s|\le x^3.

Moreover,

∣D′D(s,χ)∣≪CL(1−cT22L≤Re⁡s≤1+1L,2≤∣Im⁡s∣≤x32).(10)\left|\frac{D'}{D}(s,\chi)\right|\ll_C L\left(1-\frac{cT^2}{2L}\le\operatorname{Re}s\le1+\frac{1}{L},\qquad2\le|\operatorname{Im}s|\le\frac{x^3}{2}\right). \tag*{(10)}

Proof. For σ>1\sigma>1, the Euler products and the inequality 3+4cos⁡θ+cos⁡(2θ)=2(1+cos⁡θ)2≥03+4\cos\theta+\cos(2\theta)=2(1+\cos\theta)^2\ge0 give

0≤−3ζ′ζ(σ)−4Re⁡D′D(σ+iv,χ)−Re⁡D′D(σ+2iv,χ2).(11)0\le-3\frac{\zeta'}{\zeta}(\sigma)-4\operatorname{Re}\frac{D'}{D}(\sigma+iv,\chi)-\operatorname{Re}\frac{D'}{D}(\sigma+2iv,\chi^2). \tag*{(11)}

Indeed this follows term by term in the absolutely convergent prime-power expansions; primes dividing the modulus contribute only the positive zeta term. Also −ζ′/ζ(σ)=1/(σ−1)+O(1)-\zeta'/\zeta(\sigma)=1/(\sigma-1)+O(1) near 11.

Suppose ρ=β+iv\rho=\beta+iv were a zero in (3.16), and set σ=1+20cT2/L\sigma=1+20cT^2/L. Apply Lemma 3.5 at heights vv and 2v2v. The evaluation points lie in the respective inner disks, and ρ\rho lies in the first zero sum, because T2/L=o(r∗)T^2/L=o(r_\ast). No zero has real part greater than 11, by the absolutely convergent Euler product. All terms in the zero sums therefore contribute nonpositively to the negative real logarithmic derivatives. Retaining the term at ρ\rho, and using 0<σ−β≤21cT2/L0<\sigma-\beta\le21cT^2/L, bounds the right-hand side of (3.18) by

(320c−421c+OC(1))LT2=(−17420c+OC(1))LT2.\left(\frac{3}{20c}-\frac{4}{21c}+O_C(1)\right)\frac{L}{T^2} =\left(-\frac{17}{420c}+O_C(1)\right)\frac{L}{T^2}.

Here the errors are OC(T2/r∗)=OC(L/T2)O_C(T^2/r_\ast)=O_C(L/T^2). Choosing a sufficiently small fixed c>0c>0 gives a contradiction.

For ss in the region of (3.17), apply the local formula centered at 1+r∗+iIm⁡s1+r_\ast+i\operatorname{Im}s. Every zero in its sum has absolute imaginary part between 11 and x3x^3, since 2≤∣Im⁡s∣≤x3/22\le|\operatorname{Im}s|\le x^3/2 and r∗=o(1)r_\ast=o(1). By (3.16), its horizontal distance from ss is at least cT2/(2L)cT^2/(2L). The OC(T2)O_C(T^2) zero terms and the local error therefore total OC(L)O_C(L), proving (3.17).

Proof of Lemma 3.1. We first establish the analogous bound with the von Mangoldt weight. Let δ=L−A−4\delta=L^{-A-4}. Smooth the indicator of I/N⊂[1,2]I/N\subset[1,2] by convolution with a nonnegative smooth kernel of width δ\delta. This gives 0≤g≤10\le g\le1, supported in [1/2,3][1/2,3], whose difference from the indicator is supported within O(δ)O(\delta) of its endpoints, and with ∥g(j)∥∞≪jδ−j\|g^{(j)}\|_\infty\ll_j\delta^{-j}. The construction also applies when II is shorter than δN\delta N. Since Λ(n)≤log⁡n\Lambda(n)\le\log n, the error in replacing the interval by g(n/N)g(n/N) is

O((δN+1)log⁡(3N)N)=O(L−A−2).(12)O\left((\delta N+1)\frac{\log(3N)}{N}\right)=O(L^{-A-2}). \tag*{(12)}

uniformly in II.

Define the Mellin transform by

g^(z)=∫0∞g(w)wzdww.\widehat{g}(z)=\int_0^\infty g(w)w^z\frac{dw}{w}.

On every fixed bounded real-part strip, integration by parts gives

∣g^(u+iv)∣≪jL(j+1)(A+5)(1+∣v∣)−j.(13)\lvert\widehat{g}(u+iv)\rvert\ll_j L^{(j+1)(A+5)}(1+\lvert v\rvert)^{-j}. \tag*{(13)}

Also ∣g^(u+iv)∣≪1\lvert\widehat{g}(u+iv)\rvert\ll1 there, by absolute integration. Mellin inversion and the absolutely convergent logarithmic derivative on Re⁡z=1/L\operatorname{Re}z=1/L yield

∑nΛ(n)χ(n)n−1+itg(n/N)=12πi∫1/L−i∞1/L+i∞g^(z)Nz(−D′D(1−it+z,χ)) dz.(14)\sum_n\Lambda(n)\chi(n)n^{-1+it}g(n/N)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{1/L-i\infty}^{1/L+i\infty}\widehat{g}(z)N^z\left(-\frac{D'}{D}(1-it+z,\chi)\right)\,dz. \tag*{(14)}

On this full line, absolute convergence gives

∣D′D(1+1/L+iu,χ)∣≤∑nΛ(n)n1+1/L=−ζ′ζ(1+1/L)≪L,\left\lvert\frac{D'}{D}(1+1/L+iu,\chi)\right\rvert\leq\sum_n\frac{\Lambda(n)}{n^{1+1/L}}=-\frac{\zeta'}{\zeta}(1+1/L)\ll L,

at every height uu.

Choose a fixed C5>A+6C_5>A+6 and put H0=LC5H_0=L^{C_5}. Then choose a fixed integration-by-parts order jj large enough that (13) makes the two tails with ∣Im⁡z∣>H0\lvert\operatorname{Im}z\rvert>H_0 in (14) O(L−A−2)O(L^{-A-2}). Explicitly their bound is

Oj(L1+(j+1)(A+5)H01−j),O_j\left(L^{1+(j+1)(A+5)}H_0^{1-j}\right),

since N1/L≪1N^{1/L}\ll1. Fix B0>C5+2B_0>C_5+2. For LB0≤∣t∣≤x2L^{B_0}\leq\lvert t\rvert\leq x^2, every point in the rectangle

−cT22L≤Re⁡z≤1L,∣Im⁡z∣≤H0-\frac{cT^2}{2L}\leq\operatorname{Re}z\leq\frac{1}{L},\qquad\lvert\operatorname{Im}z\rvert\leq H_0

has

2≤∣−t+Im⁡z∣≤x2+H0<x32.(15)2\leq\lvert-t+\operatorname{Im}z\rvert\leq x^2+H_0<\frac{x^3}{2}. \tag*{(15)}

for large xx. Thus Lemma 3.6 applies throughout the rectangle. There are no zeros or poles of the logarithmic derivative inside it; in particular, the possible principal-character pole at z=itz=it is outside it.

Shift the truncated contour to Re⁡z=−cT2/(2L)\operatorname{Re}z=-cT^2/(2L). The horizontal edges are O(L−A−2)O(L^{-A-2}), by (10) and (13), increasing the already fixed order jj if necessary. On the new vertical segment,

∣Nz∣=exp⁡(−cT2log⁡N2L)≪exp⁡(−cτT2/2).\lvert N^z\rvert=\exp\left(-\frac{cT^2\log N}{2L}\right)\ll\exp(-c\tau T^2/2).

Its remaining factors and length cost at most a fixed power of LL. Since exp⁡(−cτT2/2)\exp(-c\tau T^2/2) is smaller than every prescribed fixed power of L−1L^{-1}, the shifted integral is O(L−A−2)O(L^{-A-2}). Together with (12), this proves, uniformly for all subintervals I⊂[N,2N]I\subset[N,2N],

∑n∈IΛ(n)χ(n)n−1+it≪L−A−2.\sum_{n\in I}\Lambda(n)\chi(n)n^{-1+it}\ll L^{-A-2}.

Prime powers of exponent at least two contribute in absolute value at most O(N−1/2(log⁡(3N))2)O(N^{-1/2}(\log(3N))^2): there are O(Nlog⁡(3N))O(\sqrt{N}\log(3N)) possible bases and exponents with N≤pa≤2NN\leq p^a\leq2N, and every summand has size O(log⁡(3N)/N)O(\log(3N)/N). This is smaller than every fixed power of L−1L^{-1} in the present range. Removing them from (3.23) gives the same uniform bound for

∑p∈I(log⁡p)χ(p)p−1+it.\sum_{p\in I}(\log p)\chi(p)p^{-1+it}.

Finally, partial summation against 1/log⁡u1/\log u, whose value and total variation on [N,2N][N,2N] are Oτ(1/L)O_\tau(1/L), removes the logarithmic weight and proves (3.1).

A prime-slot shifted correlation with a common parity twist

We prove the shifted-correlation estimate needed below. The graph transference and residual ideal operator are imported from [4]; the replacement of a long rough-integer factor by a prime factor, and the common parity twist, are proved here.

Groups, marked weights, and the assertion

Fix

0<a<b<c<d<0.47,c0,C0,v−,v+>0,0<q0<1,ℓ≥1.0<a<b<c<d<0.47,\qquad c_0,C_0,v_-,v_+>0,\qquad0<q_0<1,\qquad\ell\geq1.

The integer ℓ\ell is fixed. Let S,B\mathcal{S},\mathcal{B} index pairwise disjoint groups of primes Pg\mathcal{P}_g, with

c0T≤∣S∣,∣B∣≤C0T,v−≤Vg:=∑p∈Pg1p≤v+,(16)c_0T\leq|\mathcal{S}|,|\mathcal{B}|\leq C_0T,\qquad v_-\leq V_g:=\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}\frac{1}{p}\leq v_+, \tag*{(16)}
Pg⊂[exp⁡(La),exp⁡(Lb)](g∈S),Pg⊂[exp⁡(Lc),exp⁡(Ld)](g∈B).\mathcal{P}_g\subset[\exp(L^a),\exp(L^b)]\quad(g\in\mathcal{S}),\qquad \mathcal{P}_g\subset[\exp(L^c),\exp(L^d)]\quad(g\in\mathcal{B}).

Each big group is the set of all primes in an interval. Put P=⋃gPg\mathcal{P}=\bigcup_g\mathcal{P}_g, sP=∣S∣+∣B∣s_{\mathcal{P}}=|\mathcal{S}|+|\mathcal{B}|, and, for n≥1n\geq1,

n∗=∏p∉Ppvp(n),ωg(n)=∑p∈Pg1p∣n,ωP(n)=∑gωg(n).n_*=\prod_{p\notin\mathcal{P}}p^{v_p(n)},\qquad \omega_g(n)=\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}1_{p\mid n},\qquad \omega_{\mathcal{P}}(n)=\sum_g\omega_g(n).

For the graph definitions below, extend ωg\omega_g and ωP\omega_{\mathcal{P}} to all n∈Zn\in\mathbb{Z} by these same divisibility formulas, including the convention that every prime divides zero. For a vector t=(tg)\mathbf{t}=(t_g) of nonnegative integers define

Wt(n)=q0ωP(n)−∑gtg∏g(ωg(n))tgVgtg,Wℓ=W(ℓ,…,ℓ).(17)W_{\mathbf{t}}(n)=q_0^{\omega_{\mathcal{P}}(n)-\sum_g t_g}\prod_g\frac{(\omega_g(n))_{t_g}}{V_g^{t_g}},\qquad W_\ell=W_{(\ell,\ldots,\ell)}. \tag*{(17)}

Here (u)t=u(u−1)⋯(u−t+1)(u)_t=u(u-1)\cdots(u-t+1), and (u)0=1(u)_0=1. An ordered marked list has tgt_g distinct prime divisors from each Pg\mathcal{P}_g. If b\mathbf{b} is a function of these lists, define

Wtb(n)=q0ωP(n)−∑gtg∏gVg−tg∑marked lists at nb.W_{\mathbf{t}}^{\mathbf{b}}(n)=q_0^{\omega_{\mathcal{P}}(n)-\sum_g t_g}\prod_gV_g^{-t_g} \sum_{\text{marked lists at }n}\mathbf{b}.

Equivalently, this is Wt(n)W_{\mathbf{t}}(n) times the average of b\mathbf{b} over its lists, with value zero when no such list exists. If tg≤tmax⁡t_g\leq t_{\max} and ∣b∣≤1|\mathbf{b}|\leq1, then

∣Wtb(n)∣≤Wt(n)≤LC(tmax⁡).(18)|W_{\mathbf{t}}^{\mathbf{b}}(n)|\leq W_{\mathbf{t}}(n)\leq L^{C(t_{\max})}. \tag*{(18)}

Indeed q0u−t(u)tVg−tq_0^{u-t}(u)_tV_g^{-t} is bounded uniformly in integers u≥tu\geq t, with a bound depending only on tmax⁡t_{\max} and the fixed group data, and there are O(T)O(T) groups.

Use the same choice at both endpoints in

ε(n)=1orε(n)=(−1)∑p∈Pvp(n).(19)\varepsilon(n)=1\quad\text{or}\quad\varepsilon(n)=(-1)^{\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}}v_p(n)}. \tag*{(19)}

In either case ε\varepsilon is completely multiplicative, real, and of modulus one. An invariant endpoint core has the form

F(n)=∑mpr=n∗αmχ0(m)miσ01p∈Ip, p primepiσ1cr.(20)F(n)=\sum_{mpr=n_*}\alpha_m\chi_0(m)m^{i\sigma_0}1_{p\in I_p,\ p\ \mathrm{prime}}p^{i\sigma_1}c_r. \tag*{(20)}

Fix 0<τ<η<1/40<\tau<\eta<1/4. Here Ip⊂[xτ,xη]I_p\subset[x^\tau,x^\eta] is an interval, ∣αm∣,∣cr∣≤LC|\alpha_m|,|c_r|\leq L^C, αm=0\alpha_m=0 unless P−(m)>WP^-(m)>W, and the modulus of χ0\chi_0 and ∣σ0∣,∣σ1∣|\sigma_0|,|\sigma_1| are at most LCL^C. The constants in this section may depend on these fixed bounds. The word invariant refers to the identity F(vn)=F(n)F(vn)=F(n) whenever v∗=1v_*=1.

Theorem 4.1 (Twisted prime-slot correlation). Let F,GF,G have the form (4.5), with possibly different coefficients, characters, intervals, and frequencies, subject to fixed bounds as above. For every fixed D0>0D_0>0 there is a fixed B>0B>0 with the following property. Suppose that the sequence α\alpha in FF satisfies

∣∑m∈Iαmχ(m)m−1+it∣≤L−B(I⊂[1,x2] an interval, mod⁡(χ)≤LB, ∣t∣≤LB).(21)\left|\sum_{m\in I}\alpha_m\chi(m)m^{-1+it}\right|\le L^{-B}\qquad\left(I\subset[1,x^2]\text{ an interval},\ \operatorname{mod}(\chi)\le L^B,\ |t|\le L^B\right). \tag*{(21)}

There is no discrepancy requirement on GG. Uniformly for xL−C≤Z≤xLCxL^{-C}\le Z\le xL^C, integers 0<∣k∣≤LC0<|k|\le L^C, ∣a1∣,∣a2∣≤LC|a_1|,|a_2|\le L^C, and smooth functions ψ\psi supported in a fixed compact subinterval of (0,∞)(0,\infty) with ∥ψ(j)∥∞≪jLC(j+1)\|\psi^{(j)}\|_\infty\ll_j L^{C(j+1)}, one has

∑z>0z+k>0ψ(z/Z)zzia1(z+k)ia2F(z)‾G(z+k)Wℓ(z)Wℓ(z+k)ε(z)ε(z+k)≪L−D0.(22)\sum_{\substack{z>0\\z+k>0}}\frac{\psi(z/Z)}{z}z^{ia_1}(z+k)^{ia_2}\overline{F(z)}G(z+k)W_\ell(z)W_\ell(z+k)\varepsilon(z)\varepsilon(z+k)\ll L^{-D_0}. \tag*{(22)}

The exponent BB depends only on D0D_0 and the displayed fixed data.

The proof uses a residual operator made up of one raw term and signed comparison terms. Transference makes the residual pairing small; after the shared dilation is removed, the raw term is the correlation in (22), because the common sign cancels. Each comparison has two independent large free products, allowing a Fourier estimate. We will bound these comparisons and subtract them from the residual pairing.

The graph inputs

We give the operator definitions to specify their normalizations. For a sufficiently large fixed integer JJ, put M=J+ℓM=J+\ell and μg(p)=1/(pVg)\mu_g(p)=1/(pV_g). A pattern ν\nu specifies Cg⊂{1,…,J}C_g\subset\{1,\ldots,J\} with Cg=∅C_g=\varnothing in small groups and ∣Cg∣≤m0|C_g|\le m_0 in big groups. Put tg=ℓ+∣Cg∣t_g=\ell+|C_g|. The first JJ slots outside CgC_g are shared between the endpoints. To form the dilation DD, take their labels and independent auxiliary labels of law μg\mu_g in the slots of CgC_g. Thus DD contains JJ labels from each group, counted with multiplicity. The coefficient KνK_\nu may depend only on the ordered big-group source and target labels and the auxiliary big-group free labels.

A physical state at n∈Zn\in\mathbb{Z} consists of MM ordered, distinct divisors from each group. Each state has mass ∏gVg−M\prod_g V_g^{-M}, with counting measure in nn. For a row transition from nn to n′=n+kDn'=n+kD, retain the shared labels and sum over all physical target lists with coefficient ∏gVg−tg\prod_g V_g^{-t_g}. Auxiliary free labels are forbidden from both endpoint lists; they may coincide with one another. The row multiplier is

KνDiζq0(ωP(n)−MsP)/2q0(ωP(n′)−MsP)/2.K_\nu D^{i\zeta}q_0^{(\omega_P(n)-Ms_P)/2}q_0^{(\omega_P(n')-Ms_P)/2}.

The operator AζA_\zeta is the sum of these row operations, averaged over independent permutations of the MM slots in every group at each endpoint. In particular the joint normalization of the two lists in group gg is Vg−M−tgV_g^{-M-t_g}.

The ideal operator acts on the probability space of the ordered big-group lists, with independent coordinates of law μg\mu_g; repetitions are permitted. It retains the same shared slots and samples both the unshared target slots and the auxiliary slots independently. If DBD_B is the big-group part of DD, its multiplier is KνDBiζΘ(DB)K_\nu D_B^{i\zeta}\Theta(D_B). The sum, symmetrized at both ends, is Tζ(Θ)T_\zeta(\Theta).

Proposition 4.2 (Transference input). The following are the Local Transference Theorem, its Endpoint Pairing Corollary, and the Absolute Physical Bounds Lemma of [4], Section 3, Theorem 3.5, Corollary 3.11, and Lemma 3.4]. Assume ∑νsup⁡∣Kν∣≤LC1\sum_{\nu}\sup|K_\nu| \le L^{C_1}, where m0,C1m_0,C_1 are fixed independently of JJ. For every fixed E>0E>0 there is an Eid>0E_{\mathrm{id}}>0, depending only on EE and the group data, such that

sup⁡Θ∈R∥Tζ(Θ)∥2→2≤L−Eid\sup_{\Theta\in\mathbb{R}}\lVert T_\zeta(\Theta)\rVert_{2\to2}\le L^{-E_{\mathrm{id}}}

implies the following conclusion for all sufficiently large fixed JJ. Let I=[X,2X)I=[X,2X) with xγ≤X≤x1/γx^\gamma\le X\le x^{1/\gamma} for some fixed γ>0\gamma>0. If ff is supported on positions in II, is independent of the chosen marks, and

sup⁡∣f∣≤exp⁡(O(L)),∥f∥,∥g∥≤X1/2LC3,\sup|f|\le\exp(O(\sqrt{L})),\qquad\lVert f\rVert,\lVert g\rVert\le X^{1/2}L^{C_3},

then

∣⟨f,Aζg⟩∣≪XL−E+2C3.(23)|\langle f,A_\zeta g\rangle|\ll XL^{-E+2C_3}. \tag*{(23)}

The lower bound for JJ may depend on m0,C1m_0,C_1; the threshold for xx may also depend on JJ, the fixed exponent bounding ∣k∣|k|, and γ\gamma. There is no additional restriction on ζ\zeta beyond the ideal norm hypothesis. The operator obtained by taking absolute values of all transition coefficients has row and column sums at most LCabsL^{C_{\mathrm{abs}}}, with CabsC_{\mathrm{abs}} independent of JJ.

Proposition 4.3 (Residual ideal family and comparison kernels). The following are the Residual Ideal Operator Theorem and Comparison Kernel Lemma of [4], Section 4, Theorem 4.1 and Lemma 4.3. For every prescribed Eid>0E_{\mathrm{id}}>0 and fixed C4≥0C_4\ge0, there are fixed m0,J0,C1m_0,J_0,C_1 such that, for each fixed J≥J0J\ge J_0, a family consisting of the raw pattern Cg=∅C_g=\varnothing, K0=1K_0=1, and signed comparison patterns satisfies

∑νsup⁡∣Kν∣≤LC1,sup⁡Θ∈R∣ζ∣≤LC4∥Tζ(Θ)∥2→2≤L−Eid.(24)\sum_\nu\sup|K_\nu|\le L^{C_1},\qquad \sup_{\substack{\Theta\in\mathbb{R}\\|\zeta|\le L^{C_4}}}\lVert T_\zeta(\Theta)\rVert_{2\to2}\le L^{-E_{\mathrm{id}}}. \tag*{(24)}

The family is independent of the individual values of Θ,ζ\Theta,\zeta, and all its defining parameters are independent of JJ.

Split the big groups into two blocks. Every comparison frees nonempty sets of probes A,BA,B in the respective blocks and has coefficient

−(−1)∣A∣+∣B∣KA(DA,XA)KB(DB,XB).(25)-(-1)^{|A|+|B|}K_A(D_A,X_A)K_B(D_B,X_B). \tag*{(25)}

Here DA,DBD_A,D_B are the free products, XAX_A is the corresponding target-mark product, and XBX_B the corresponding source-mark product. No shared label or final ℓ\ell mark enters these kernels. For a slot set Λ\Lambda, their exact form is

KΛ(D,X)=∑j:νΛj≥ξ1log⁡D∈Ij1log⁡X∈IjνΛj∑χ primitivecond⁡(χ)≤Qχ(D)‾χ(X),Ij=[jh,(j+1)h),(26)K_\Lambda(D,X)=\sum_{j:\nu_{\Lambda j}\ge\xi} \frac{\mathbf{1}_{\log D\in I_j}\mathbf{1}_{\log X\in I_j}}{\nu_{\Lambda j}} \sum_{\substack{\chi\ \mathrm{primitive}\\ \operatorname{cond}(\chi)\le Q}} \overline{\chi(D)}\chi(X),\qquad I_j=[jh,(j+1)h), \tag*{(26)}

where νΛj\nu_{\Lambda j} is the probability of the indicated cell under the independent slot laws. The quantities Q,h−1,ξ−1Q,h^{-1},\xi^{-1} are fixed powers of LL, with h≤1h\le1. There are at most Q2Q^2 characters and Om0(1+TLd/h)O_{m_0}(1+TL^d/h) nonempty cells, and

sup⁡∣KΛ∣≤Q2ξ−1,sup⁡XED∣KΛ(D,X)∣≤Q2.\sup|K_\Lambda|\le Q^2\xi^{-1},\qquad\sup_X\mathbb{E}_D|K_\Lambda(D,X)|\le Q^2.

More precisely, the parameters can be chosen, independently of JJ, so that for any fixed A0>0A_0>0, any tuple tests f(XB),g(XA)f(X_B),g(X_A), and every θ∈R\theta\in\mathbb{R}, ∣ζ∣≤LC4|\zeta|\le L^{C_4},

∣E f(XB)‾g(XA)[(XAXB)iζe(θXAXB)−KA(DA,XA)KB(DB,XB)(DADB)iζe(θDADB)]∣≤L−A0∥f∥2∥g∥2.(27)\left|\mathbb{E}\,\overline{f(X_B)}g(X_A)\left[(X_AX_B)^{i\zeta}e(\theta X_AX_B)-K_A(D_A,X_A)K_B(D_B,X_B)(D_AD_B)^{i\zeta}e(\theta D_AD_B)\right]\right| \le L^{-A_0}\lVert f\rVert_2\lVert g\rVert_2. \tag*{(27)}

All four label tuples in this expectation are independent. The tests need not be functions only of their products. Expanding the two kernels in (25), including all patterns, has total coefficient mass and number of terms bounded by fixed powers of LL.

These are precisely the graph inputs we use. In particular, (26) consists of two global character and cell expansions, not one expansion for each group.

Endpoint norms and removal of the shared dilation

We now prove Theorem 4.1 using these contracts. Write τ(v)\tau(v) for the divisor-counting function. The pointwise estimate

∣F(n)∣≪LC′τ(n∗)2|F(n)| \ll L^{C'}\tau(n_*)^2

follows by counting the three-factor decompositions in (4.5); the same estimate holds for GG. On physical states the function

F(n)ε(n)q0(ωP(n)−MsP)/2F(n)\varepsilon(n)q_0^{(\omega_P(n)-M s_P)/2}

is independent of the chosen marks, and its damping is at most one. For a fixed physical list of product PP, one has n∗∣n/Pn_* \mid n/P. Consequently Proposition 2.2 gives, uniformly on a fixed enlargement of a position dyad,

∑n≍XP∣n∣F(n)∣2≪LC′∑v≪X/Pτ(v)4≪(X/P)LC′′.\sum_{\substack{n\asymp X\\ P\mid n}} |F(n)|^2 \ll L^{C'}\sum_{v\ll X/P}\tau(v)^4 \ll(X/P)L^{C''}.

The normalized reciprocal sum of the admissible lists is at most

∏gVg−M∑lists1P≤∏g(∑p∈Pg1pVg)M=1.\prod_g V_g^{-M}\sum_{\mathrm{lists}}\frac{1}{P} \leq\prod_g\left(\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}\frac{1}{pV_g}\right)^M=1.

Here P≤exp⁡(OJ(TLd))=xo(1)P\leq\exp(O_J(TL^d))=x^{o(1)}, so X/PX/P is in the ordinary divisor-moment range. We have proved

∥Fεq0(ωP−MsP)/2∥n≍X≪X1/2LC3,\left\|F\varepsilon q_0^{(\omega_P-Ms_P)/2}\right\|_{n\asymp X}\ll X^{1/2}L^{C_3},

with C3C_3 independent of JJ and of the subsequent kernel choices. Bounded smooth factors do not affect this independence. Moreover, both mm and pp in (4.5) are WW-rough for large xx. There are at most O(L)O(\sqrt{L}) prime factors above WW in n≍x1+o(1)n\asymp x^{1+o(1)}, counted with multiplicity. Assigning each such factor to mm, pp, or the remaining factor shows

∣F(n)∣≤LC33O(L)=exp⁡(O(L)).(28)|F(n)|\leq L^{C_3}3^{O(\sqrt{L})}=\exp(O(\sqrt{L})). \tag*{(28)}

This proves every endpoint hypothesis of Proposition 4.2.

Consider the physical pairing with extra cutoff, harmonic measure, and phases

ψ(n/(ZD))nD−i(a1+a2)nia1(n′)ia2F(n)‾G(n′)ε(n)ε(n′)q0(ωP(n)−MsP)/2q0(ωP(n′)−MsP)/2.\frac{\psi(n/(ZD))}{n}D^{-i(a_1+a_2)}n^{ia_1}(n')^{ia_2}\overline{F(n)}G(n')\varepsilon(n)\varepsilon(n')q_0^{(\omega_P(n)-Ms_P)/2}q_0^{(\omega_P(n')-Ms_P)/2}.

The row operation itself contributes the other two half-damping factors in (4.8). Summation over states, auxiliary draws, and patterns is understood in (4.17), with the row coefficient KνK_\nu.

Here n≍ZD=x1+o(1)n\asymp ZD=x^{1+o(1)} and ∣n′−n∣=xo(1)|n'-n|=x^{o(1)}. Split nn among O(L)O(L) dyads [X,2X)[X,2X) and restrict n′n' to a fixed enlargement of each dyad. As in Lemma 2.4, Fourier inversion of u↦ψ(eu)u\mapsto\psi(e^u) separates the cutoff into powers of nn and DD; put the bounded factor X/nX/n in the first vector and divide the pairing by XX. The total Fourier integral mass is a fixed power of LL, independent of JJ.

We specify a useful quantifier here. If the logarithmic cutoff derivatives are bounded by Oj(LCψ(j+1))O_j(L^{C_\psi(j+1)}), fix an exponent F0>Cψ+2F_0>C_\psi+2 before forming the ideal family. Integration by parts gives, for each fixed NN,

∫∣v∣>LF0∣ψ∘exp⁡(v)^∣ dv≪NLCψ(N+1)−F0(N−1).\int_{\lvert v\rvert>LF_0}\left\lvert\widehat{\psi\circ\exp(v)}\right\rvert\,\mathrm{d}v\ll_N L^{C_\psi(N+1)-F_0(N-1)}.

Thus this same cutoff exponent permits arbitrary saving by increasing NN. Choose C4C_4 to contain a1+a2a_1+a_2 and all frequencies in the truncated integral. By (4.15) and (28), choose EE large enough for the desired saving after the fixed Fourier and dyadic costs; then choose EidE_{\mathrm{id}}, the residual family, and finally JJ. The Fourier tail is bounded using the absolute row and column bounds of Proposition 4.2; its accuracy can be increased after the family and JJ have been fixed without changing F0F_0 or C4C_4. It follows that the sum of the residual pairings is O(L−D)O(L^{-D}) for any prescribed fixed DD.

We next identify each individual pairing. Write D=DRDCD=D_RD_C, where DRD_R is the shared product and DCD_C the free product, and put n=DRwn=D_Rw, n′=DRw′n'=D_Rw'. Then w′=w+kDCw'=w+kD_C. Away from overlaps of shared labels with one another or with the divisors of w,w′w,w', the number of shared labels in group gg is M−tgM-t_g, and

ωg(DRw)−M=ωg(w)−tg.\omega_g(D_Rw)-M=\omega_g(w)-t_g.

The full damping therefore leaves exactly the two damping factors of Wt(w)Wt(w′)W_t(w)W_t(w'). The identity

Vg−M−tg=Vg−(M−tg)Vg−2tgV_g^{-M-t_g}=V_g^{-(M-t_g)}V_g^{-2t_g}

and 1/n=1/(DRw)1/n=1/(D_Rw) turn the shared labels into independent draws of law μg\mu_g, leaving the normalizations for the two unshared marked lists. The cores are unchanged. The sign identity is exact, even when overlaps occur:

ε(DRw)ε(DRw′)=ε(DR)2ε(w)ε(w′)=ε(w)ε(w′).\varepsilon(D_Rw)\varepsilon(D_Rw')=\varepsilon(D_R)^2\varepsilon(w)\varepsilon(w')=\varepsilon(w)\varepsilon(w').

The phases and cutoff in (4.17) become

ψ(wZDC)wDCia1w′DCia21DRw.\psi\left(\frac{w}{ZD_C}\right)\frac{w}{D_C}^{ia_1}\frac{w'}{D_C}^{ia_2}\frac{1}{D_Rw}.

Since the outer vectors were mark-independent, the initial symmetrizations do not alter this computation. After summing the shared labels, the pairing for pattern ν\nu is, up to negligible error,

Efree∑w′>0w′=w+kDC>0ψ(w/(ZDC))w(w/DC)ia1(w′/DC)ia2F(w)G(w′)‾ε(w)ε(w′)⋅Wt(w)Wt(w′)EmarksKν.(29)\mathbb{E}_{\mathrm{free}}\sum_{\substack{w'>0\\w'=w+kD_C>0}} \frac{\psi\left(w/(ZD_C)\right)}{w} (w/D_C)^{ia_1}(w'/D_C)^{ia_2}F(w)\overline{G(w')}\varepsilon(w)\varepsilon(w') \cdot W_t(w)W_t(w')\mathbb{E}_{\mathrm{marks}}K_\nu. \tag*{(29)}

The final expectation means averaging over the unshared marked lists.

For completeness, all discarded restrictions have superpolynomial logarithmic saving. Conditional on w,w′w,w', the free labels, and earlier shared draws, at most OJ(L)O_J(L) prime values are excluded from a shared draw. Every atom is O(exp⁡(−La))O(\exp(-L^a)). When bounding actual overlapping configurations, unshared physical marks still divide w,w′w,w'; ignoring damping changes their weight by at most q0−2MsP=LOJ(1)q_0^{-2M s_P}=L^{O_J(1)}. Equations eq:4.3 and (4.14), followed by Cauchy–Schwarz and fixed divisor moments on the two translated intervals, bound the remaining harmonic sum by LOJ(1)L^{O_J(1)}. Shared overlaps thus cost LOJ(1)exp⁡(−La)L^{O_J(1)}\exp(-L^a).

If an auxiliary free label p′p' belongs to an unshared endpoint list, then p′∣DCp'\mid D_C and hence p′∣w,w′p'\mid w,w'. Set w=p′yw=p'y. The new shift kDC/p′kD_C/p' is integral, the invariant cores are unchanged, and the harmonic measure supplies 1/p′1/p'. Applying the same divisor moments at scale ZDC/p′ZD_C/p' bounds this contribution by LOJ(1)/p′L^{O_J(1)}/p'. There are OJ(T)O_J(T) free slots and p′≥exp⁡(Lc)p' \ge\exp(L^c). This bounds all free exclusions. After summing the fixed-power coefficient costs, the error in (4.19) is OA(L−A)O_A(L^{-A}) for every fixed AA. For the raw pattern, DC=1D_C=1, t=(ℓ,…,ℓ)\mathbf{t}=(\ell,\ldots,\ell), and (4.19) is exactly the left side of (4.7). It remains to bound the comparisons.

Comparison multipliers and minor arcs

Expand the two kernels in a comparison using (4.12). Their four factors are bounded weights on DA,DBD_A,D_B and on the big unshared marks at the respective endpoints, times a total coefficient cost LO(1)L^{O(1)}. The free products are restricted to logarithmic cells of width at most one. Let their lower endpoints be U1,U2U_1,U_2, put H′=U1U2H'=U_1U_2, and set Y=ZH′Y=ZH'. Then

U1,U2≥exp⁡(Lc−O(1)),H′≤exp⁡(O(TLd)),Y=x1+o(1).(30)U_1,U_2 \ge\exp(L^c-O(1)),\qquad H' \le\exp(O(TL^d)),\qquad Y=x^{1+o(1)}. \tag*{(30)}

The positions w,w′w,w' in (4.19) are comparable to YY. Logarithmic Fourier separation of the smooth cutoff and phases therefore reduces it, with total cost LO(1)/YL^{O(1)}/Y, to expressions

E b1(DA)b2(DB)∑wU‾(w)V(w+kDADB),∣b1∣,∣b2∣≤1.(31)\mathbb{E}\,b_1(D_A)b_2(D_B)\sum_w \overline{U}(w)V(w+kD_AD_B),\qquad|b_1|,|b_2|\le1. \tag*{(31)}

An endpoint here is its core times ε\varepsilon, a power twist of fixed log-power frequency, WtbW_t^b with bb depending only on big marks, and a smooth size cutoff at YY. Fixed divisor moments give

∑w∣U(w)∣2+∑w∣V(w)∣2≪YLC5.(32)\sum_w |U(w)|^2+\sum_w |V(w)|^2\ll YL^{C_5}. \tag*{(32)}

They also control the Fourier-separation tails to arbitrary accuracy. The Fourier multiplier of (4.21) is

m(θ)=E b1(DA)b2(DB)e(kθDADB),∣m(θ)∣≤1.m(\theta)=\mathbb{E}\,b_1(D_A)b_2(D_B)e(k\theta D_AD_B),\qquad|m(\theta)|\le1.

For a selected product DD with at most m0m_0 slots per group, unique factorization gives

P(D=n)=1n∏gkg!Vgkg∏p∈Pgvp(n)!≤LC6n.(33)\mathbb{P}(D=n)=\frac{1}{n}\prod_g\frac{k_g!}{V_g^{k_g}\prod_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}v_p(n)!}\le\frac{L^{C_6}}{n}. \tag*{(33)}

Thus a bounded test collapsed onto product values n≍Uin\asymp U_i has squared coefficient norm O(LC6/Ui)O(L^{C_6}/U_i). We use the integer bilinear estimate of [4], Section 4, Lemma 4.2: for coefficients on intervals of lengths O(U),O(V)O(U),O(V), and α=u/r+β\alpha=u/r+\beta with (u,r)=1(u,r)=1, ∣β∣≤r−2|\beta|\le r^{-2},

∣∑n,tanbte(αnt)∣≪∥a∥2∥b∥2[U+(1+Vr){U+rlog⁡(2r)}]1/2.\left|\sum_{n,t}a_nb_t e(\alpha nt)\right|\ll\|a\|_2\|b\|_2\left[U+\left(1+\frac{V}{r}\right)\{U+r\log(2r)\}\right]^{1/2}.

Arbitrary missing coefficients and translated containing intervals are allowed. Together with (4.23), this bounds ∣m(θ)∣|m(\theta)| by

LC7(1U2+1r+log⁡(2r)U1+rlog⁡(2r)H′)1/2.(34)L^{C_7}\left(\frac{1}{U_2}+\frac{1}{r}+\frac{\log(2r)}{U_1}+\frac{r\log(2r)}{H'}\right)^{1/2}. \tag*{(34)}

whenever rr is a Dirichlet-approximation denominator for kθk\theta.

Choose such an approximation with maximum denominator ⌊H′/LC′⌋\lfloor H'/L^{C'}\rfloor. If r>LC′r>L^{C'}, all terms in (34) save an arbitrarily large fixed log power when C′C' is sufficiently large, by (30). If r≤LC′r\le L^{C'}, then θ\theta belongs, after accounting for ∣k∣≤LC|k|\le L^C, to an arc

∣θ−hr∣R/Z≤LCarcH′,1≤r≤LCarc,hmodr,(35)\left|\theta-\frac{h}{r}\right|_{\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}}\le\frac{L^{C_{\mathrm{arc}}}}{H'},\qquad1\le r\le L^{C_{\mathrm{arc}}},\qquad h\mathop{\rm mod} r, \tag*{(35)}

for a sufficiently large fixed CarcC_{\mathrm{arc}}. The letters h,rh,r in (35) denote the resulting rational center, rather than necessarily the original approximation. There are a fixed logarithmic power of arcs. Parseval and (32) dispose of their complement. On the arcs, Cauchy–Schwarz shows that it suffices to prove, for every fixed A>0A>0 and every arc center h/rh/r,

∫∣β∣≤1/H∣U^(h/r+β)∣2 dβ≪AYL−A,H=H′/LCarc.(36)\int_{|\beta|\le1/H} |\widehat{U}(h/r+\beta)|^2\,d\beta\ll_A YL^{-A},\qquad H=H'/L^{C_{\mathrm{arc}}}. \tag*{(36)}

Here U^(θ)=∑wU(w)e(θw)\widehat{U}(\theta)=\sum_w U(w)e(\theta w), H→∞H\to\infty, and H=xo(1)H=x^{o(1)}.

The endpoint on a major arc

Choose a small group gsg_s and a designated one of its ℓ≥1\ell\ge1 marks. Because the mark weight b\mathbf b uses only big marks, removing this prime gives, unless a prime in gsg_s divides ww twice,

Wtb(w)=1Vgs∑ps∣wps∈PgsWt−egsb(w/ps).(37)W_{\mathbf t}^{\mathbf b}(w)=\frac{1}{V_{g_s}}\sum_{\substack{p_s\mid w\\p_s\in\mathcal P_{g_s}}}W_{\mathbf t-\mathbf e_{g_s}}^{\mathbf b}(w/p_s). \tag*{(37)}

The equality includes damping: removing psp_s decreases both ωP\omega_{\mathcal P} and ∑qtg\sum_q t_g by one. On the excluded set both weights are bounded by fixed log powers. Since w∗∣w/ps2w_* \mid w/p_s^2 on a multiple of ps2p_s^2, divisor moments show that the endpoint error has squared norm

≪YLC8∑ps∈Pgsps−2≪YLC8exp⁡(−La).(38)\ll YL^{C_8}\sum_{p_s\in\mathcal P_{g_s}}p_s^{-2}\ll YL^{C_8}\exp(-L^a). \tag*{(38)}

Its Fourier energy is negligible by Parseval.

The factors m,pm,p in eq:4.5 contain no group prime. After (37), write w=mpspr′w=mp_sp r'. Complete multiplicativity gives ε(w)=ε(ps)ε(r′)\varepsilon(w)=\varepsilon(p_s)\varepsilon(r'); the remaining marked weight and cr′c_{r'} are functions of r′r' alone. They have a fixed log-power bound, so may be absorbed into one residual coefficient.

To remove the rational center, fix d′=(r′,r)d'=(r',r) and put q=r/d′q=r/d'. The first three factors m,ps,pm,p_s,p are units modulo rr for all large xx, and r′/d′r'/d' is a unit modulo qq. On units the exact character expansion is

e(hv/q)=∑χmodqch,q(χ)χ(v),ch,q(χ)=1φ(q)∑vmodqe(hv/q)χ(v)‾,∣ch,q(χ)∣≤1.(39)e(hv/q)=\sum_{\chi\mathop{\rm mod}q}c_{h,q}(\chi)\chi(v),\qquad c_{h,q}(\chi)=\frac{1}{\varphi(q)}\sum_{v\mathop{\rm mod}q}e(hv/q)\overline{\chi(v)},\qquad|c_{h,q}(\chi)|\le1. \tag*{(39)}

Apply this with v=mpsp(r′/d′)v=mp_sp(r'/d'). The gcd restriction and χ(r′/d′)\chi(r'/d') go into the residual coefficient. Summing over d′d' and all characters costs a fixed power of LL and includes the principal and imprimitive characters. The product of the new character on mm with χ0\chi_0 is a character of fixed log-power modulus. It is therefore enough to bound the energy at zero of

aw=ψ1(w/Y)wiv1∑mpspr′=wαmχm(m)miσ0bs(ps)1p∈Ip, p primeχp(p)piσ1dr′.(40)a_w=\psi_1(w/Y)w^{iv_1}\sum_{mp_sp r'=w}\alpha_m\chi_m(m)m^{i\sigma_0}b_s(p_s)1_{p\in I_p,\ p\ {\rm prime}}\chi_p(p)p^{i\sigma_1}d_{r'}. \tag*{(40)}

Here ps∈Pgsp_s\in\mathcal P_{g_s}, ∣bs∣≪1|b_s|\ll1, ∣dr′∣≤LC9|d_{r'}|\le L^{C_9}, and all characters, frequencies and smooth-cutoff derivatives have fixed log-power bounds. The sign on psp_s and 1/Vgs1/V_{g_s} are included in bsb_s. In particular,

∑w∣aw∣2≪YLC10.(41)\sum_w|a_w|^2\ll YL^{C_{10}}. \tag*{(41)}

Local Fourier energy and Mellin polynomials

We include the scale conversion from [4], Section 5, equation (5.16) with its proof, as its normalization is useful here.

Lemma 4.4 (Local Mellin energy). Let awa_w be supported on w≍Yw \asymp Y, where Y=x1+o(1)Y=x^{1+o(1)}, and let H=xo(1)H=x^{o(1)} tend to infinity. For every fixed j≥1j\ge1,

∫∣β∣≤1/H∣a^(β)∣2 dβ≪j1Y∫R(1+H∣t∣Y)−j∣∑wawwit∣2 dt+(HY)2∑w∣aw∣2.(42)\int_{|\beta|\leq1/H}|\widehat{a}(\beta)|^2\,d\beta\ll_j \frac{1}{Y}\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left(1+\frac{H|t|}{Y}\right)^{-j}\left|\sum_w a_w w^{it}\right|^2\,dt+\left(\frac{H}{Y}\right)^2\sum_w|a_w|^2. \tag*{(42)}

Proof. Take a smooth bump KK of integral one, supported sufficiently near zero that its Fourier transform, with convention K^(ξ)=∫K(u)e(−ξu) du\widehat K(\xi)=\int K(u)e(-\xi u)\,du, has modulus at least 1/21/2 on [−1,1][-1,1]. Plancherel gives

∫∣β∣≤1/H∣a^(β)∣2 dβ≪H−2∫R∣∑wawK((w−v)/H)∣2 dv.\int_{|\beta|\leq1/H}|\widehat{a}(\beta)|^2\,d\beta\ll H^{-2}\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left|\sum_w a_wK((w-v)/H)\right|^2\,dv.

Only v≍Yv\asymp Y contributes. Keep this restriction when replacing the kernel by K(vlog⁡(w/v)/H)K(v\log(w/v)/H). On the union of their supports, ∣w−v∣≪H|w-v|\ll H, and their arguments differ by O(H/Y)O(H/Y). Cauchy–Schwarz over the O(H)O(H) possible integers ww, followed by integration over the O(H)O(H) centers for each ww, bounds the normalized squared error by (H/Y)2∑w∣aw∣2(H/Y)^2\sum_w|a_w|^2.

Put h0=H/Yh_0=H/Y, v=Yexp⁡(u)v=Y\exp(u), and Pa(t)=∑wawwitP_a(t)=\sum_w a_w w^{it}. Fourier inversion for the new kernel gives

∑wawK(vlog⁡(w/v)/H)=h02π∫Re−uK^(h0e−ut/(2π))v−itPa(t) dt.\sum_w a_wK(v\log(w/v)/H)=\frac{h_0}{2\pi}\int_{\mathbb{R}}e^{-u}\widehat K(h_0e^{-u}t/(2\pi))v^{-it}P_a(t)\,dt.

Insert a fixed smooth compact cutoff in uu equal to one on the required range. The Fourier transform in uu of the resulting amplitude e−uK^(h0e−ut/(2π))e^{-u}\widehat K(h_0e^{-u}t/(2\pi)) is bounded by

Cj(1+∣s∣)−2(1+h0∣t∣)−j,C_j(1+|s|)^{-2}(1+h_0|t|)^{-j},

by two integrations by parts and the Schwartz bounds for K^\widehat K. Expand that amplitude in its uu-Fourier transform, apply Minkowski in ss and Plancherel in uu, and use dv≪Y dudv\ll Y\,du. The normalization is H−2Yh02=Y−1H^{-2}Yh_0^2=Y^{-1}. Increasing the decay order if necessary proves (4.32).

Apply this lemma to (4.30). The error term is OA(YL−A)O_A(YL^{-A}) for every fixed AA, by (4.31). Dirichlet-polynomial mean squares imply, on every dyadic time scale R≥1R\geq1,

Y−2∫R≤∣t∣≤2R∣Pa(t)∣2 dt≪(1+R/Y)LC11.(43)Y^{-2}\int_{R\leq|t|\leq2R}|P_a(t)|^2\,dt\ll(1+R/Y)L^{C_{11}}. \tag*{(43)}

Consequently, with T0=LY/HT_0=LY/H, the part ∣t∣>T0|t|>T_0 of the first term in (4.32) is at most

YLC11∑r≥0(2rL)−j(1+2rLH)≪jYLC11−j(1+L/H).YL^{C_{11}}\sum_{r\geq0}(2^rL)^{-j}\left(1+\frac{2^rL}{H}\right)\ll_j YL^{C_{11}-j}(1+L/H).

It is OA(YL−A)O_A(YL^{-A}) on taking jj large enough.

Split the four variables in (4.30) into dyads. There are O(L4)O(L^4) relevant boxes, and their product scales are comparable to YY. Write

Pa(t)Y=∑w1w((w/Y)ψ1(w/Y))wi(t+v1)∑mpsp′=w(the four coefficients).\frac{P_a(t)}{Y}=\sum_w\frac{1}{w}((w/Y)\psi_1(w/Y))w^{i(t+v_1)}\sum_{mpsp'=w}\text{(the four coefficients)}.

Fourier-separate the parenthesized function in log⁡(w/Y)\log(w/Y). On every box the fourfold collapsed reciprocal coefficients have squared norm ≪LC12/Y\ll L^{C_{12}}/Y, by a fixed divisor moment. Hence centered mean squares give a bound LC13L^{C_{13}} for the integral of their squared polynomial on any translate of [−T0,T0][-T_0,T_0]. Minkowski therefore bounds a separating-frequency tail by a fixed log power times the square of the L1L^1 mass of that tail. Integration by parts makes it arbitrarily small at a fixed log-power cutoff. This proves the claimed separation also for unbounded tail frequencies. Retained shifts enlarge the time interval to at most [−2T0,2T0][-2T_0,2T_0], since Y/HY/H exceeds every fixed log power.

After absorbing these shifts into tt and the fixed frequencies, it suffices to prove, for arbitrary fixed A′>0A'>0,

∫∣t∣≤2LY/H∣Ps(t)Pl(t)R(t)∣2 dt≪L−A′.(44)\int_{\lvert t\rvert\le2LY/H} \lvert P_s(t)P_l(t)R(t)\rvert^2\,dt \ll L^{-A'}. \tag*{(44)}

where

Ps(t)=∑ps≍Pbs(ps)ps−1+it,P_s(t)=\sum_{p_s\asymp P} b_s(p_s)p_s^{-1+it},
Pl(t)=∑p≍P′p∈Ipp primeχp(p)p−1+iσ1+it,P_l(t)=\sum_{\substack{p\asymp P'\\ p\in I_p\\ p\ \mathrm{prime}}}\chi_p(p)p^{-1+i\sigma_1+it},
R(t)=(∑m≍M1αmχm(m)m−1+iσ0+it)(∑r′≍R1dr′(r′)−1+it).R(t)=\left(\sum_{m\asymp M_1}\alpha_m\chi_m(m)m^{-1+i\sigma_0+it}\right)\left(\sum_{r'\asymp R_1}d_{r'}(r')^{-1+it}\right).

The small primes retain their group restriction, and each dyad is intersected with its original interval. Their sizes satisfy

12exp⁡(La)≤P≤exp⁡(Lb),xτ/2≤P′≤xη,PM1P′R1≍Y.(45)\frac{1}{2}\exp(L^a)\le P\le\exp(L^b),\qquad x^{\tau/2}\le P'\le x^\eta,\qquad PM_1P'R_1\asymp Y. \tag*{(45)}

For any subproduct of these four polynomials, collapsed as ∑n≍Ucnnit\sum_{n\asymp U}c_n n^{it}, a fixed divisor moment gives

∑n∣cn∣2≪LC14/U.(46)\sum_n\lvert c_n\rvert^2\ll L^{C_{14}}/U. \tag*{(46)}

Only four convolution factors are involved: all remaining marked weights have already entered the single bounded coefficient dr′d_{r'}.

Exceptional times and completion of the proof

First consider ∣Ps(t)∣≤L−As\lvert P_s(t)\rvert\le L^{-A_s}. The polynomial PlRP_lR has size Y/PY/P, and

Y/P2LY/H=H2LP⟶∞\frac{Y/P}{2LY/H}=\frac{H}{2LP}\longrightarrow\infty

by b<cb<c and (4.20). Its mean square on the entire time interval is LO(1)L^{O(1)}, by (4.36). Choose AsA_s sufficiently large to bound this part of (4.34).

Let J\mathcal{J} be the integer unit intervals meeting {∣t∣≤2LY/H:∣Ps(t)∣>L−As}\{\lvert t\rvert\le2LY/H:\lvert P_s(t)\rvert>L^{-A_s}\}. We establish

∣J∣≤exp⁡(O(Lb+L1−alog⁡L))=Yo(1).(47)\lvert\mathcal{J}\rvert\le\exp\left(O(L^b+L^{1-a}\log L)\right)=Y^{o(1)}. \tag*{(47)}

Put j0=⌊log⁡Y/log⁡(2P)⌋j_0=\lfloor\log Y/\log(2P)\rfloor. Unique factorization shows directly that the squared coefficient norm of Psj0P_s^{j_0} is at most

j0!(∑ps≍P∣bs(ps)∣2ps−2)j0≤j0!(C/P)j0.(48)j_0!\left(\sum_{p_s\asymp P}\lvert b_s(p_s)\rvert^2p_s^{-2}\right)^{j_0}\le j_0!(C/P)^{j_0}. \tag*{(48)}

Indeed for each multiset of j0j_0 primes, one of the two multinomial coefficients in its squared coefficient is at most j0!j_0!. This argument remains valid when j0j_0 grows; no growing-order divisor-moment estimate is being used.

Select a point with ∣Ps∣>L−As|P_s| > L^{-A_s} in each occupied interval. Split the intervals into three classes according to their integer index modulo three, so the chosen points in a class are separated by at least one. The indices of Psj0P_s^{j_0} are at most YY, and the time range is contained in [−Y,Y][-Y,Y] for large xx. The separated-point mean-square inequality and (4.38) give

∣J∣≪YLC15j0!(CL2AsP)j0.|\mathcal{J}| \ll Y L^{C_{15}} j_0! \left(\frac{C L^{2A_s}}{P}\right)^{j_0}.

Since YP−j0≤2P2j0Y P^{-j_0} \le2P^{2j_0}, log⁡P≤Lb\log P \le L^b, and j0=O(L1−α)j_0 = O(L^{1-\alpha}), this proves (47).

We next prove the sparse mean-square estimate

∑I∈Jsup⁡t∈I∣R(t)∣2≪LC16.(49)\sum_{I\in\mathcal{J}}\sup_{t\in I}|\mathcal{R}(t)|^2 \ll L^{C_{16}}. \tag*{(49)}

Collapse R(t)=∑n≍Ucnnit\mathcal{R}(t)=\sum_{n\asymp U}c_n n^{it}, where

U=M1R1≍YPP′≥Y1−η−o(1)>Y0.6,∑n∣cn∣2≪LC14U.U=M_1R_1\asymp\frac{Y}{PP'}\ge Y^{1-\eta-o(1)}>Y^{0.6},\qquad\sum_n|c_n|^2\ll\frac{L^{C_{14}}}{U}.

Choose a maximizing point on each closed unit interval and again split into three separated classes. The Gram matrix of the evaluation vectors (niti)n≍U(n^{it_i})_{n\asymp U} has entries ∑n≍Uni(ti−tj)\sum_{n\asymp U}n^{i(t_i-t_j)}. For 1≤∣Δ∣≤c∗U1\leq|\Delta|\leq c_*U, with a sufficiently small fixed c∗>0c_*>0, the derivative of Δlog⁡n/(2π)\Delta\log n/(2\pi) is monotone, has magnitude comparable to ∣Δ∣/U|\Delta|/U, and is bounded away from nonzero integers. The first derivative test of Proposition 2.3 gives O(U/∣Δ∣)O(U/|\Delta|). For c∗U≤∣Δ∣≪Yc_*U\leq|\Delta|\ll Y, the second derivative test gives

O(∣Δ∣+U∣Δ∣)=O(Y1/2).O\left(\sqrt{|\Delta|}+\frac{U}{\sqrt{|\Delta|}}\right)=O(Y^{1/2}).

The diagonal entry is O(U)O(U). Thus all entries are bounded by

O(U1+∣ti−tj∣+Y1/2).O\left(\frac{U}{1+|t_i-t_j|}+Y^{1/2}\right).

Separation and (47) bound an absolute row sum by

O(Ulog⁡Y+∣J∣Y1/2)=O(Ulog⁡Y).O(U\log Y+|\mathcal{J}|Y^{1/2})=O(U\log Y).

The operator norm is bounded by this row sum. Multiplying by ∑∣cn∣2\sum|c_n|^2 proves (49).

On the exceptional intervals, ∣Ps(t)∣≪1|P_s(t)|\ll1. Prescribe a sufficiently large saving for PlP_l, and apply Lemma 3.1. Choose B1B_1 larger than its frequency threshold and the fixed exponent bounding ∣σ1∣|\sigma_1|. For ∣t∣≥LB1|t|\geq L^{B_1} in the present range, the lemma applies to t+σ1t+\sigma_1: it is above the required logarithmic threshold and

∣t+σ1∣≤2LY/H+∣σ1∣<x2.|t+\sigma_1|\leq2LY/H+|\sigma_1|<x^2.

It bounds PlP_l by an arbitrarily large negative log power. (49) then proves the required integral bound for these times.

For ∣t∣≤LB1|t|\leq L^{B_1}, use (4.6) on the mm-polynomial in R\mathcal{R}. Its dyad lies below x2x^2; the character modulus and shifted frequency are fixed log powers. All other factors have fixed log-power absolute bounds. Choosing BB last, larger than these modulus and frequency exponents and with 2B>B1+C17+A′2B>B_1+C_{17}+A', makes this last integral O(L−A′)O(L^{-A'}). This proves (4.34), hence (4.26).

The major-arc estimate, the minor-arc estimate, and Parseval now bound every comparison (4.19) by an arbitrarily large negative log power, after paying the fixed number of arcs, kernel expansions, and Fourier integrals. Their sum has the same bound. Subtracting it from the controlled residual pairing leaves the raw pattern, which is (4.7). This completes the proof of Theorem 4.1.

Remark 4.5 (Order of choices). The endpoint norm exponent and the original Fourier cutoff exponent are fixed from the input data. Then choose the physical accuracy EE, ideal accuracy EidE_{\mathrm{id}}, ideal frequency range C4C_4, all kernel parameters, and finally a sufficiently large fixed JJ. Once this family is fixed, choose the minor-arc and major-arc accuracies, the prime-polynomial accuracy and threshold B1B_1, and last the discrepancy exponent BB. Any stronger Fourier-tail saving required by these choices is obtained by more integrations by parts at the already fixed cutoff exponent. No kernel parameter or frequency range has to be changed after choosing JJ.

Candidate weights and their mass

The ordinary bands QjQ_j give an even number of prime slots and allow the candidate to be split near a prescribed size. The smaller groups PgP_g supply the graph marks and the odd parity restriction. Separating the two families keeps these roles independent.

We now fix the prime groups used in the remainder of the proof. All constants in this section depend only on the following fixed geometry and on the function Ψ\Psi. In particular, they are independent of the parameters κ\kappa, b1b_1 and of the proxy precision chosen later.

Choose a fixed even integer r0r_0 sufficiently large that

(r0−1)c12≥c2+1,c2s′<14.\frac{(r_0-1)c_1}{2} \ge c_2+1,\qquad c_2s' < \frac{1}{4}.

where

c1=1,c2=65,c3=32,c4=95,s′=1r0(c1+c2),sj=s′2−jL.(50)c_1=1,\qquad c_2=\frac{6}{5},\qquad c_3=\frac{3}{2},\qquad c_4=\frac{9}{5},\qquad s'=\frac{1}{r_0(c_1+c_2)},\qquad s_j=s'2^{-j}L. \tag*{(50)}

Let jxj_x be the largest nonnegative integer with c1sjx≥20Tc_1s_{j_x}\ge20T, and let QjQ_j consist of the primes with c1sj≤log⁡p≤c2sjc_1s_j\le\log p\le c_2s_j, for 0≤j≤jx0\le j\le j_x. For each jj such that [c3sj,c4sj][c_3s_j,c_4s_j] is contained in either [L1/10,L1/5][L^{1/10},L^{1/5}] or [L3/10,L2/5][L^{3/10},L^{2/5}], take the primes whose logarithms belong to [c3sj,c4sj][c_3s_j,c_4s_j] as one group PgP_g. As before, P\mathcal{P} is the union of these groups and n∗n_\ast is the part of nn supported outside P\mathcal{P}.

These intervals are mutually disjoint, including between the QjQ_j and the PgP_g: indeed c2<c3<c4<2c1c_2<c_3<c_4<2c_1 and c4/2<c1c_4/2<c_1. The number of groups in a logarithmic range [La,Lb][L^a,L^b] is (b−a)T/log⁡2+O(1)(b-a)T/\log2+O(1). The prime number theorem and partial summation give, uniformly in the indices,

VQ,j:=∑p∈Qj1p=log⁡65+o(1),Vg:=∑p∈Pg1p=log⁡65+o(1).(51)V_{Q,j}:=\sum_{p\in Q_j}\frac{1}{p}=\log\frac{6}{5}+o(1),\qquad V_g:=\sum_{p\in P_g}\frac{1}{p}=\log\frac{6}{5}+o(1). \tag*{(51)}

The uniformity follows because the smallest logarithmic endpoint tends to infinity. Thus the group hypotheses of Theorem 4.1 hold with (a,b,c,d)=(1/10,1/5,3/10,2/5)(a,b,c,d)=(1/10,1/5,3/10,2/5). Every prime in our construction is at least L20L^{20} once xx is sufficiently large. The classical prime estimates used here and below are those in [4], Section “Notation and preliminary estimates”.

Take q0=1/2q_0=1/2 and ℓ=1\ell=1 in the marked weights, so explicitly

W1(n)=∏gq0ωg(n)−1ωg(n)Vg.W_1(n)=\prod_g\frac{q_0^{\omega_g(n)-1}\omega_g(n)}{V_g}.

For a positive integer vv, let a(v)a(v) be the number of ordered prime tuples with product vv, with r0r_0 slots in every QjQ_j, divided by (r0!)jx+1(r_0!)^{j_x+1}. Repetitions are allowed. Fix a nonnegative smooth function Ψ\Psi supported in [1,2][1,2] and positive on a nonempty open subinterval of (1,2)(1,2). Define

E(u)=(−1)∑p∈Pvp(u),A0(u)=W1(u)a(u∗),\mathcal{E}(u)=(-1)^{\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}}v_p(u)},\qquad A_0(u)=W_1(u)a(u_\ast),
A(u)=A0(u)1−E(u)2,XA=∑uA(u)Ψ(u/x).(52)A(u)=A_0(u)\frac{1-\mathcal{E}(u)}{2},\qquad X_A=\sum_u A(u)\Psi(u/x). \tag*{(52)}

Here vp(u)v_p(u) denotes the exponent of pp in uu. If epe_p are the exponents of an integer in the support of aa, then

a(v)=∏j=0jx∏p∈Qj1ep!,∑p∈Qjep=r0.a(v)=\prod_{j=0}^{j_x}\prod_{p\in Q_j}\frac{1}{e_p!},\qquad\sum_{p\in Q_j}e_p=r_0.

In particular 0≤a(v)≤10\le a(v)\le1. The function k↦kq0k−1k\mapsto kq_0^{k-1} is bounded on the nonnegative integers, and there are O(T)O(T) groups with VgV_g bounded away from zero. Consequently

0≤A(u)≤A0(u)≤LC00\le A(u)\le A_0(u)\le L^{C_0}

for a fixed C0C_0. The ordinary part of a supported integer has exactly r0(jx+1)r_0(j_x+1) prime factors counted with multiplicity. This number is even, whereas the parity projection in AA selects an odd number of group-prime factors. Thus

A(u)>0⟹Ω(u) is odd,Ω(2u) is even.(53)A(u)>0\quad\Longrightarrow\quad\Omega(u)\text{ is odd},\qquad\Omega(2u)\text{ is even}. \tag*{(53)}

Harmonic measures and the group tail

Set

HQ=∑a(v)v=∏j=0jxVQ,jr0r0!,HP=∑r: r∗=1W1(r)r.(54)H_Q=\sum\frac{a(v)}{v}=\prod_{j=0}^{j_x}\frac{V_{Q,j}^{r_0}}{r_0!},\qquad H_P=\sum_{r:\,r^*=1}\frac{W_1(r)}{r}. \tag*{(54)}

Since jx+1=O(T)j_x+1=O(T), (51) gives L−C≤HQ≤LCL^{-C}\le H_Q\le L^C for a fixed CC. For one group introduce

Zg(q)=∏p∈Pg(1+qp−1).Z_g(q)=\prod_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}\left(1+\frac{q}{p-1}\right).

The factor of HPH_P associated with this group is

Hg=Zg′(q0)Vg=Zg(q0)Vg∑p∈Pg1p−1+q0.(55)H_g=\frac{Z'_g(q_0)}{V_g}=\frac{Z_g(q_0)}{V_g}\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}\frac{1}{p-1+q_0}. \tag*{(55)}

This follows by expanding the Euler product: each occurring prime has harmonic mass ∑k≥1p−k=1/(p−1)\sum_{k\ge1}p^{-k}=1/(p-1), and differentiation chooses one of the distinct prime divisors as its mark. Because q0≤1q_0\le1, the sum on the right of (55) is at least VgV_g. The same sum is bounded above, and Zg(q0)Z_g(q_0) is bounded above, by constants uniform in gg. Hence

1≤Zg(q0)≤Hg≤C,HP=∏gHg,1≤HP≤LC,∏p∈P(1+q0p−1)≤HP.(56)1\le Z_g(q_0)\le H_g\le C,\qquad H_P=\prod_g H_g,\qquad1\le H_P\le L^C,\qquad\prod_{p\in\mathcal{P}}\left(1+\frac{q_0}{p-1}\right)\le H_P. \tag*{(56)}

Normalize a(v)/va(v)/v and W1(r)/rW_1(r)/r by HQH_Q and HPH_P, respectively, and draw the two parts independently. The QQ-measure can equivalently be sampled by drawing every ordered slot independently with law 1/(pVQ,j)1/(pV_{Q,j}) in band jj. The group measure is a product of the normalized measures belonging to (55). Write VV and RR for these two random integers and U=VRU=VR.

In one group the unnormalized harmonic mass of total multiplicity one is exactly Vg/Vg=1V_g/V_g=1. The contribution to multiplicity two from two distinct primes is

2q0Vg∑p<q∈Pg1pq=q0Vg(Vg2−∑p∈Pg1p2).\frac{2q_0}{V_g}\sum_{p<q\in\mathcal{P}_g}\frac{1}{pq} =\frac{q_0}{V_g}\left(V_g^2-\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}\frac{1}{p^2}\right).

It is bounded below by a positive constant for sufficiently large xx. Since Hg≤CH_g \le C, each group therefore has both even and odd total multiplicity with probability at least a fixed δ0>0\delta_0 > 0. Conditioning on all groups except one proves

P(E(R)=−1)≥δ0.(57)\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}(R)=-1) \ge\delta_0. \tag*{(57)}

The bound is independent of the number of groups.

Lemma 5.1 (Tail of the group part). There is a fixed CC such that, for each fixed σ>0\sigma> 0,

∑r>xσr∗=1W1(r)r≤LCexp⁡(−σL3/5)\sum_{\substack{r>x^\sigma\\ r_*=1}} \frac{W_1(r)}{r} \le L^C \exp(-\sigma L^{3/5})

for all sufficiently large xx.

Proof. Put δ=L−2/5\delta= L^{-2/5}. The mass in one group after inserting rδr^\delta is

∏p∈Pg(1+q0p1−δ−1)1Vg∑p∈Pg1p1−δ−1+q0.\prod_{p\in P_g}\left(1+\frac{q_0}{p^{1-\delta}-1}\right)\frac{1}{V_g}\sum_{p\in P_g}\frac{1}{p^{1-\delta}-1+q_0}.

Every group prime satisfies pδ≤ep^\delta\le e, so this expression is bounded above by a fixed constant, using Equation (51). Multiplying over O(T)O(T) groups gives ∑r∗=1W1(r)r−1+δ≤LC\sum_{r_*=1} W_1(r)r^{-1+\delta} \le L^C. For r>xσr>x^\sigma, the extra factor is at least xσδ=exp⁡(σL3/5)x^{\sigma\delta}=\exp(\sigma L^{3/5}), proving the assertion. □

Localization at the target size

Lemma 5.2 (Total candidate mass). There is a fixed CAC_A such that

XA≍xLHQHP,XA≫xL−CA.X_A \asymp\frac{x}{L}H_QH_P,\qquad X_A \gg xL^{-C_A}.

The implied constants and CAC_A depend only on the fixed geometry and on Ψ\Psi.

Proof. The exact probability identity is

XA=HQHPE[Ψ(U/x)1{E(R)=−1}].(58)X_A=H_QH_P\mathbb{E}\left[\Psi(U/x)\mathbf{1}_{\{\mathcal{E}(R)=-1\}}\right]. \tag*{(58)}

Leave one ordered slot in Q0Q_0 free and condition on every other variable. On the support of Ψ(U/x)\Psi(U/x), its logarithm must lie in an interval of length log⁡2\log2. Uniformly in the location of such an interval, its normalized harmonic prime mass in Q0Q_0 is O(1/L)O(1/L). For example, after intersecting with Q0Q_0, the interval is contained in [y,2y][y,2y] with log⁡y≍L\log y \asymp L, and the prime number theorem bounds the reciprocal prime sum there by O(1/L)O(1/L). Since U≤2xU\le2x on the effective support, this proves the upper bound.

For the lower bound let

mj=c1+c22sj,Δ=(c2−c1)s′L.m_j=\frac{c_1+c_2}{2}s_j,\qquad\Delta=(c_2-c_1)s'L.

The infinite midpoint sum satisfies r0∑j≥0mj=Lr_0\sum_{j\ge0}m_j=L, by the choice of s′s'. Choose a fixed integer J0J_0 such that

∑j>J0r0c2sj<Δ/24.\sum_{j>J_0}r_0c_2s_j<\Delta/24.

For sufficiently large xx we have jx>J0j_x>J_0. Restrict all slots in 0≤j≤J00\le j\le J_0, except the free slot in Q0Q_0, to fixed small neighborhoods of their respective midpoints, choosing the widths so that their total logarithmic deviation is less than Δ/24\Delta/24. There are only finitely many restrictions, each with harmonic probability bounded below by a positive constant by the prime number theorem. Their joint probability is therefore bounded below.

Independently, require E(R)=−1\mathcal{E}(R)=-1 and log⁡R≤Δ/12\log R\le\Delta/12. Equations (5.8) and (5.9), together with Lemma 5.1 applied to the fixed positive number Δ/(12L)\Delta/(12L), show that these two requirements have probability at least δ0/2\delta_0/2 for sufficiently large xx. No restrictions are needed on the remaining QQ-slots. Their total logarithm and the infinite midpoint sum for their bands both lie between zero and Δ/24\Delta/24. Consequently, if BB is the logarithm of the product of all variables except the free prime, then on the event just described

∣B−(L−m0)∣<Δ/6.\lvert B-(L-m_0)\rvert<\Delta/6.

Choose 1<α<β<21<\alpha<\beta<2 with Ψ(t)≥cΨ>0\Psi(t)\ge c_{\Psi}>0 throughout [α,β][\alpha,\beta]. For the free prime it is enough to require

log⁡p∈[L+log⁡α−B,L+log⁡β−B].\log p\in[L+\log\alpha-B,L+\log\beta-B].

This interval has the fixed positive length log⁡(β/α)\log(\beta/\alpha). Its endpoints lie strictly inside [c1s0,c2s0][c_1s_0,c_2s_0] with distance ≫Δ\gg\Delta from the boundary, since m0m_0 is its midpoint and Δ\Delta its full width. The prime number theorem and partial summation give harmonic mass ≫1/L\gg1/L for the interval, uniformly in the conditioned variables. On it U≥αxU\ge\alpha x and Ψ(U/x)≥cΨ\Psi(U/x)\ge c_{\Psi}. (58) now gives the lower bound. Finally HQ≥L−CH_Q\ge L^{-C} and HP≥1H_P\ge1 imply the stated fixed-power lower bound for XAX_A.

Squarefree predecessors

Lemma 5.3 (Squarefree loss). The mass of nonsquarefree predecessors satisfies

∑u≥12u not squarefreeA(u)Ψ(u/x)=o(XA/L).\sum_{\substack{u\ge1\\2u\ \text{not squarefree}}} A(u)\Psi(u/x)=o(X_A/L).

Proof. In one QQ-band the probability that two given slots coincide is

∑p∈Qj1p2VQ,j2≤L−20VQ,j≪L−20.\sum_{p\in Q_j}\frac{1}{p^2V_{Q,j}^2}\le\frac{L^{-20}}{V_{Q,j}}\ll L^{-20}.

The number of pairs of slots within bands is O(T)O(T), so the probability of any repeated QQ-prime is O(TL−20)O(TL^{-20}).

For completeness, fix p∈Pgp\in\mathcal{P}_g and write Zg,p(q)=∏q′∈Pgq′≠p(1+q/(q′−1))Z_{g,p}(q)=\prod_{\substack{q'\in\mathcal{P}_g\\q'\ne p}}(1+q/(q'-1)). The unnormalized mass of integers in this group that are divisible by pp is

Zg,p(q0)+q0Zg,p′(q0)Vg(p−1)≪1p.\frac{Z_{g,p}(q_0)+q_0Z'_{g,p}(q_0)}{V_g(p-1)}\ll\frac{1}{p}.

The bound follows from the uniform group harmonic masses; division by Hg≥1H_g\ge1 preserves it. Conditional on the set of distinct prime divisors, the exponent of an occurring prime has distribution proportional to p−kp^{-k}, k≥1k\ge1. The conditional probability that its exponent is at least two is therefore exactly 1/p1/p. Thus the probability of a square from the group part is

≪∑p∈P1p2≤e−L1/10∑gVg≪Te−L1/10.\ll\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}}\frac{1}{p^2}\le e^{-L^{1/10}}\sum_g V_g\ll Te^{-L^{1/10}}.

All bands and groups are disjoint, and all their primes are odd. It follows that 2U2U is not squarefree with probability O(TL−20)O(TL^{-20}) under the unrestricted harmonic measure. Using (58) and dropping parity and size localization gives the upper bound

2x∥Ψ∥∞HQHPO(TL−20)≪xHQHPTL−20.2x\lVert\Psi\rVert_{\infty}H_QH_P O(TL^{-20}) \ll xH_QH_PT L^{-20}.

By Lemma 5.2, its ratio to XA/LX_A/L is O(TL−18)=o(1)O(TL^{-18})=o(1), as required.

Bilinear distribution

We retain the groups, ordinary prime bands, and weights of the preceding section. In particular, every ordinary slot contains a prime, there are r0r_0 labelled slots in each QjQ_j, and

sj=s′2−jL,20T≤sjx<40T,(r0−1)c12≥c2+1.s_j=s'2^{-j}L,\qquad20T\le s_jx<40T,\qquad\frac{(r_0-1)c_1}{2}\ge c_2+1.

The smooth allocation and change of variables below follow the Type II method of [4]. We give the argument for the present all-prime weight and its parity twist, using Theorem 4.1 for the resulting correlations.

Theorem 6.1 (Type II distribution). Fix D∗,b∗,C>0D_*,b_*,C>0. Let U,VU,V be dyadic scales such that

UV≍x,xb∗≤U,V≤x1−b∗,UV\asymp x,\qquad x^{b_*}\le U,V\le x^{1-b_*},

and let K⊂[U,2U)K\subset[U,2U) and J⊂[V,2V)J\subset[V,2V) be intervals. Suppose ∣αm∣,∣βn∣≤LC|\alpha_m|,|\beta_n|\le L^C and αm=0\alpha_m=0 unless P−(m)>WP^-(m)>W. There is a fixed BB, depending only on these fixed data and on the fixed weight and cutoff data, for which the following holds. Assume that the sequence αm1m∈K\alpha_m1_{m\in K} satisfies (4.6); explicitly, assume

∣∑m∈Iαm1m∈Kχ(m)m−1+it∣≤L−B(I⊂[1,x2] an interval, mod⁡(χ)≤LB, ∣t∣≤LB).(59)\left|\sum_{m\in I}\alpha_m1_{m\in K}\chi(m)m^{-1+it}\right| \le L^{-B} \left(\frac{I\subset[1,x^2]\text{ an interval},\ \operatorname{mod}(\chi)\le L^B,\ |t|\le L^B}{ }\right). \tag*{(59)}

Then

∑m∈K, n∈J, u≥1mn=2u+1αmβnA(u)Ψ(u/x)≪xL−D∗.\sum_{\substack{m\in K,\ n\in J,\ u\ge1\\ mn=2u+1}} \alpha_m\beta_n A(u)\Psi(u/x)\ll xL^{-D_*}.

The estimate is uniform in the intervals and coefficient sequences satisfying these assumptions. No discrepancy or smoothness assumption is imposed on β\beta.

Proof. Extend the actually restricted sequences by zero, and write them again as α\alpha and β\beta. Thus α\alpha in every subsequent convolution is the sequence appearing in (6.1). By A=A0(1−E)/2A=A_0(1-\mathcal{E})/2, it suffices to prove the assertion with A0(u)ε(u)A_0(u)\varepsilon(u), for each of the two choices

ε=1orε=E.\varepsilon=1\quad\text{or}\quad\varepsilon=\mathcal{E}.

The choice will be the same at the two endpoints of each correlation.

Removing a large group-prime part. Choose a fixed band index j∗∗j_{**} so large that

τ=c1s′/2−j∗∗>0,η=c2s′/2−j∗∗<min⁡(b∗/4,1/4).(60)\tau=c_1s'/2^{-j_{**}}>0,\qquad\eta=c_2s'/2^{-j_{**}}<\min(b_*/4,1/4). \tag*{(60)}

For sufficiently large xx, this band is present. Designate one of its labelled slots, whose prime therefore lies in [xτ,xη][x^\tau,x^\eta]. This merely names an existing slot in the weight.

Put uP=u/u∗u_{\mathrm{P}}=u/u_*. We first discard uP>xb∗/4u_{\mathrm{P}}>x^{b_*/4}. For u≍xu\asymp x, the part of 2u+12u+1 supported on primes exceeding WW has at most O(L/log⁡W)=O(L)O(L/\log W)=O(\sqrt{L}) prime factors with multiplicity. Its number of divisors is consequently at most exp⁡(O(L))\exp(O(\sqrt{L})), since a+1≤2aa+1\le2^a for a≥1a\ge1. This bounds the possible rough divisors mm. The tail bound in Lemma 5.1, with d=2/5d=2/5, gives

∑mn=2u+1, u≍xuP>xb∗/4∣αmβn∣A0(u)∣Ψ(u/x)∣≪xLO(1)exp⁡(O(L))(∑va(v)v)∑r>xb∗/4r∗=1W1(r)r≪xLO(1)exp⁡(−b∗4L1−d+O(L)).(61)\sum_{\substack{mn=2u+1,\ u\asymp x\\u_{\mathrm{P}}>x^{b_*/4}}} |\alpha_m\beta_n|A_0(u)|\Psi(u/x)| \ll xL^{O(1)}\exp(O(\sqrt{L})) \left(\sum_v\frac{a(v)}{v}\right) \sum_{\substack{r>x^{b_*/4}\\r_*=1}}\frac{W_1(r)}{r} \ll xL^{O(1)}\exp\left(-\frac{b_*}{4}L^{1-d}+O(\sqrt{L})\right). \tag*{(61)}

To obtain the first inequality, write u=vru=vr, use vr≍xvr\asymp x to bound 1≪x/(vr)1\ll x/(vr), and then drop the product restriction. The harmonic ordinary-slot mass is HQ=LO(1)H_Q=L^{O(1)}. Since 1−d>1/21-d>1/2, (6.4) is OH(xL−H)O_H(xL^{-H}) for every fixed HH. The same conclusion will hold whenever we reinstate these discarded tuples with a multiplier of absolute value at most one.

A smooth allocation with bounded residual. Set

E=UL−K0,(62)E=UL^{-K_0}, \tag*{(62)}

where the fixed positive constant K0K_0 will be chosen below. Put the entire group-prime part and the designated prime into hh. Process all remaining ordinary slots by increasing band index, in a fixed order within each band, assigning each slot either to ee or to hh. Write these slots as p1,…,pNp_1,\ldots,p_N, with band indices j(i)j(i); here N=r0(jx+1)−1=O(T)N=r_0(j_x+1)-1=O(T).

Fix a smooth function γ:R→[0,1]\gamma:\mathbb{R}\to[0,1] equal to zero on (−∞,0](-\infty,0] and to one on [1,∞)[1,\infty). At slot ii, with residual target RiR_i, assign the prime to ee with weight

γ(Ri−log⁡pisj(i))\gamma\left(\frac{R_i-\log p_i}{s_{j(i)}}\right)

and to hh with the complementary weight. Start with R1=log⁡ER_1=\log E, and subtract log⁡pi\log p_i from the residual precisely when the slot is assigned to ee.

For a tuple surviving the preceding deletion, the product withheld from allocation is at most x∗b∗/2x_*^{b_*/2}. Since u≍xu\asymp x and U≤x1−b∗U\le x^{1-b_*}, its available logarithms satisfy, for large xx,

0<log⁡E≤∑i=1Nlog⁡pi.0<\log E\le\sum_{i=1}^{N}\log p_i.

Every branch of positive weight has the invariant

0≤Ri≤∑t=iNlog⁡pt+(c2+1)sjx(1≤i≤N+1).(63)0\le R_i\le\sum_{t=i}^{N}\log p_t+(c_2+1)s_{j_x}\qquad(1\le i\le N+1). \tag*{(63)}

Indeed, taking a slot requires Ri>log⁡piR_i > \log p_i, so preserves both nonnegativity and the upper bound after subtracting that logarithm. Skipping a slot in band jj requires

Ri<log⁡pi+sj≤(c2+1)sj.R_i < \log p_i + s_j \le(c_2+1)s_j.

If j<jxj < j_x, the next band has at least r0−1r_0-1 available slots and therefore total logarithm at least (r0−1)c1sj/2≥(c2+1)sj(r_0-1)c_1s_j/2 \ge(c_2+1)s_j. These slots are all still unprocessed. If j=jxj=j_x, the error term in (63) supplies the bound directly. This proves the invariant by induction, including the terminal step.

The geometric sum of all unprocessed band scales is O(sj(i))O(s_{j(i)}). Thus (63) also places every argument (Ri−log⁡pi)/sj(i)(R_i-\log p_i)/s_{j(i)} in one fixed compact interval, independently of K0K_0. At termination,

0≤log⁡(E/e)=RN+1≤(c2+1)sjx.0 \le\log(E/e)=R_{N+1}\le(c_2+1)s_{j_x}.

Choose once and for all Cs>40(c2+1)C_s>40(c_2+1). Every surviving branch has

EL−Cs≤e≤E.(64)EL^{-C_s}\le e\le E. \tag*{(64)}

This choice of CsC_s is independent of K0K_0.

Choose a fixed smooth ρ:R→[0,1]\rho:\mathbb{R}\to[0,1] of compact support which equals one throughout the possible argument interval, and put

f1=ργ,f0=ρ(1−γ).f_1=\rho\gamma,\qquad f_0=\rho(1-\gamma).

The allocation is unchanged on the retained tuples. On any tuple the sum of its full branch weights is at most one, since f0+f1=ρ≤1f_0+f_1=\rho\le1 at every node of the choice tree. We may consequently impose (64) and reinstate all discarded tuples, with the same negligible error (61).

Separation and its uniform cost. Use the Fourier convention

f^(ξ)=∫Rf(t)e−iξt dt,f(t)=∫Rf^(ξ)eiξtdξ2π,\widehat{f}(\xi)=\int_{\mathbb{R}}f(t)e^{-i\xi t}\,\mathrm{d}t,\qquad f(t)=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\widehat{f}(\xi)e^{i\xi t}\frac{\mathrm{d}\xi}{2\pi},

and set

CF=max⁡(1,∫∣f0^(ξ)∣dξ2π,∫∣f1^(ξ)∣dξ2π).C_F=\max\left(1,\int\lvert\widehat{f_0}(\xi)\rvert\frac{\mathrm{d}\xi}{2\pi},\int\lvert\widehat{f_1}(\xi)\rvert\frac{\mathrm{d}\xi}{2\pi}\right).

For a fixed branch δ=(δ1,…,δN)∈{0,1}N\delta=(\delta_1,\ldots,\delta_N)\in\{0,1\}^N, Fourier inversion of its NN transitions has total variation at most CFNC_F^N. Summing over the branches costs at most

(2CF)N≤LCf.(65)(2C_F)^N\le L^{C_f}. \tag*{(65)}

for a fixed exponent, increased below to include the fixed cutoff Ψ\Psi. In particular this exponent is independent of K0K_0. Truncating each transition variable at ∣ξi∣≤L\lvert\xi_i\rvert\le L has total error at most

2NNCMCFN−1L−M(66)2^NNC_MC_F^{N-1}L^{-M} \tag*{(66)}

for any fixed MM, by the union bound on the complementary integration regions and the rapid decay of a single Fourier factor. The constant CMC_M occurs only once in each term of this estimate. Increasing MM therefore does not increase the exponent arising from CFNC_F^N.

To see the separated phases explicitly, use Ri=log⁡E−∑t<iδtlog⁡ptR_i=\log E-\sum_{t<i}\delta_t\log p_t. The product of the Fourier phases is

exp⁡(ilog⁡E∑i=1Nξisj(i))∏t=1Nptiσt,σt=−ξtsj(t)−δt∑i>tξisj(i).(67)\exp\left(i\log E\sum_{i=1}^{N}\frac{\xi_i}{s_{j(i)}}\right)\prod_{t=1}^{N}p_t^{i\sigma_t},\qquad\sigma_t=-\frac{\xi_t}{s_{j(t)}}-\delta_t\sum_{i>t}\frac{\xi_i}{s_{j(i)}}. \tag*{(67)}

The dependence on EE is entirely in the scalar of modulus one. Since ∑isj(i)−1=O(T−1)\sum_i s_{j(i)}^{-1}=O(T^{-1}), the retained frequencies satisfy ∣σt∣=O(L/T)|\sigma_t|=O(L/T). Fourier inversion of the fixed smooth function t↦Ψ(et)t\mapsto\Psi(e^t) likewise separates Ψ(eh/x)\Psi(eh/x), with bounded integral norm; truncation at a fixed power of LL has arbitrary logarithmic accuracy. Its contribution is a factor hiϱh^{i\varrho}, a factor eiϱe^{i\varrho} absorbed into the coefficient of ee, and a scalar of modulus one.

All these errors can be summed before Cauchy–Schwarz. The original m,nm,n restrictions still imply u≍xu\asymp x, and the unmodified factorization mass is bounded by

∑mn=2u+1u≍x∣αmβn∣A0(u)≪LO(1)∑v≍xτ(v)≪xLO(1).\sum_{\substack{mn=2u+1\\u\asymp x}}|\alpha_m\beta_n|A_0(u)\ll L^{O(1)}\sum_{v\asymp x}\tau(v)\ll xL^{O(1)}.

Here and below τ\tau is the divisor function. The same estimate applies to the labelled-slot sum with its original factorial normalization. Combining it with (66) proves an error OH(xL−H)O_H(xL^{-H}) for arbitrary fixed HH, without changing the fixed exponent in (65).

Consequently the required sum is, up to these errors, a sum and integral of total variation at most LCfL^{C_f} of expressions

B′=∑e,nae(e)βn∑mn=2eh+1αmah(h),(68)B'=\sum_{e,n}a_e(e)\beta_n\sum_{mn=2eh+1}\alpha_ma_h(h), \tag*{(68)}
ah(h)=hiϱϵ(h)W1(h)H(h∗),H(t)=∑pr=t1p∈Qj∗piσcr.(69)a_h(h)=h^{i\varrho}\epsilon(h)W_1(h)H(h_*),\qquad H(t)=\sum_{pr=t}\mathbf{1}_{p\in\mathcal{Q}_{j_*}}p^{i\sigma}c_r. \tag*{(69)}

The original m,nm,n restrictions are in α,β\alpha,\beta, and the ee range (64) is in aea_e. The prime in HH is the designated prime. Its phase can be taken to be zero at this stage; we allow a bounded-power frequency σ\sigma in the notation. All phases in (69) have fixed logarithmic-power bounds.

Both aea_e and crc_r are bounded coefficients. In fact, for a fixed branch and a fixed product, disjointness of the bands determines the prime multiset in every band. There are at most r0!r_0! assignments to the relevant labelled slots of any one band, even when primes repeat. Distributing the original factorial normalizations between the two coefficients only improves the resulting bound

∣ae(e)∣,∣cr∣≤(r0!)jx+1≤LCa,∣ah(h)∣≤LChτ(h∗).(70)|a_e(e)|,|c_r|\le(r_0!)^{jx+1}\le L^{C_a},\qquad|a_h(h)|\le L^{C_h}\tau(h_*). \tag*{(70)}

The last bound comes from summing over the designated prime divisor of h∗h_*. The exponents Ca,ChC_a,C_h are fixed independently of K0K_0 and of the Fourier error accuracy. Only ordinary-band primes were assigned to ee, so its removal leaves the marked group weight and the sign exactly on hh, as used in (69).

Cauchy–Schwarz and the diagonal

Choose bounded nonnegative smooth majorants ηe,ηn\eta_e,\eta_n, equal to at least one on the e,ne,n ranges. We can arrange

supp⁡ηe⊂[12L−Cs,2],supp⁡ηn⊂[1/2,3],∥ηe(j)∥∞+∥ηn(j)∥∞≪jLCη(j+1),\operatorname{supp}\eta_e\subset\left[\tfrac12L^{-C_s},2\right],\qquad\operatorname{supp}\eta_n\subset[1/2,3],\qquad\|\eta_e^{(j)}\|_\infty+\|\eta_n^{(j)}\|_\infty\ll_j L^{C_\eta(j+1)},

where CηC_\eta depends only on CsC_s. There are O(EV)O(EV) pairs (e,n)(e,n) in the original ranges. Hence (70) and Cauchy–Schwarz give

∣B′∣2≪EVLCpN,N=∑e,nηe(e/E)ηn(n/V)∣∑mn=2eh+1αmah(h)∣2.(71)|B'|^2\ll EVL^{C_p}\mathcal{N},\qquad\mathcal{N}=\sum_{e,n}\eta_e(e/E)\eta_n(n/V)\left|\sum_{mn=2eh+1}\alpha_ma_h(h)\right|^2. \tag*{(71)}

Here CpC_p is fixed independently of K0K_0.

The diagonal m=m′m=m' in the square forces h=h′h=h'. Collecting by v=mnv=mn and then using (6.12) gives

Ndiag≪LCd′∑v≍xv oddτ(v)∑e∣(v−1)/2τ((v−12e)2)≤LCd′∑v≍xτ(v)τ(v−1)3≪xLCd′.(72)\mathcal{N}_{\mathrm{diag}} \ll L^{C'_d}\sum_{\substack{v\asymp x\\ v\ \mathrm{odd}}}\tau(v)\sum_{e\mid(v-1)/2}\tau\left(\left(\frac{v-1}{2e}\right)^2\right) \le L^{C'_d}\sum_{v\asymp x}\tau(v)\tau(v-1)^3\ll xL^{C'_d}. \tag*{(72)}

The final estimate follows from Cauchy–Schwarz and the fixed second and sixth moments of τ\tau in Proposition 2.2. Enlarging the ee divisor set in this calculation makes Cd′C'_d independent of K0K_0. Since EV≍xL−K0EV\asymp xL^{-K_0}, the diagonal contribution to the right side of (6.13) is at most x2L−K0+Cp+Cd′x^2L^{-K_0+C_p+C'_d}. We now fix

K0>2(D∗+Cf+1)+Cp+Cd′.(73)K_0>2(D_*+C_f+1)+C_p+C'_d. \tag*{(73)}

It remains to obtain an arbitrarily strong logarithmic saving for the off-diagonal part of N\mathcal{N} with this fixed K0K_0.

The off-diagonal change of variables. A pair of representations in the expanded square satisfies

mn=2eh+1,m′n=2eh′+1.mn=2eh+1,\qquad m'n=2eh'+1.

The first identity gives (n,2e)=1(n,2e)=1. Subtracting the two identities therefore gives a unique integer kk with

m′−m=2ek,h′−h=kn,z=m′h,z+k=mh′.(74)m'-m=2ek,\qquad h'-h=kn,\qquad z=m'h,\qquad z+k=mh'. \tag*{(74)}

Indeed mh′−m′h=k(mn−2eh)=kmh'-m'h=k(mn-2eh)=k. On the off-diagonal k≠0k\ne0, and the lower support bound for ee gives

0<∣k∣≪LK0+Cs.(75)0<|k|\ll L^{K_0+C_s}. \tag*{(75)}

For completeness, this parametrization is reversible for both signs of kk. Start from positive factorizations z=m′hz=m'h, z+k=mh′z+k=mh', require m′≡m(mod2∣k∣)m'\equiv m\pmod{2|k|}, and put

e=m′−m2k>0,n=2eh+1m.(76)e=\frac{m'-m}{2k}>0,\qquad n=\frac{2eh+1}{m}. \tag*{(76)}

The first quantity is an integer. The determinant identity implies

m(h′−h)=k(2eh+1).m(h'-h)=k(2eh+1).

Since P−(m)>WP^{-}(m)>W and kk has the fixed logarithmic-power bound (6.17), we have (m,k)=1(m,k)=1 for large xx. Thus nn is a positive integer and h′−h=knh'-h=kn. Substituting m′=m+2ekm'=m+2ek recovers m′n=2eh′+1m'n=2eh'+1. Every reconstructed variable is unique. Applying the size cutoffs in (6.13) therefore gives an exact bijection, with no additional multiplicity or divisibility condition.

Both m,m′m,m' are odd and coprime to kk. With qk=2∣k∣q_k=2|k|, their congruence is imposed exactly by

1m′≡m(modqk)=1φ(qk)∑χ(modqk)χ(m)χ(m′)‾.(77)\mathbf{1}_{m'\equiv m\pmod{q_k}}=\frac{1}{\varphi(q_k)}\sum_{\chi\pmod{q_k}}\chi(m)\overline{\chi(m')}. \tag*{(77)}

The normalized character sum has total coefficient mass one.

The pulled-back cutoffs. On the supports above, h≍x/eh \asymp x/e and m′≍Um' \asymp U. Thus z≍Ux/ez \asymp Ux/e lies between fixed constant multiples of xLK0xL^{K_0} and xLK0+CsxL^{K_0+C_s}. Insert a smooth dyadic partition in zz, retaining an outer cutoff ψZ(z/Z)\psi_Z(z/Z) in every piece. Only O(1+T)O(1+T) dyads are needed, and all have Z=xLO(1)Z=xL^{O(1)}.

For a fixed k,Zk,Z, put

t1=log⁡(m/U),t2=log⁡(m′/U),t3=log⁡(z/Z).t_1=\log(m/U),\qquad t_2=\log(m'/U),\qquad t_3=\log(z/Z).

The arguments of the two majorants are exactly

eE=m′−m2kE=U2kE(et2−et1),nV=1V((m′−m)zkmm′+1m)=ZkUVet3(e−t1−e−t2)+1UVe−t1.(78)\begin{aligned} \frac{e}{E}&=\frac{m'-m}{2kE}=\frac{U}{2kE}\left(e^{t_2}-e^{t_1}\right),\\ \frac{n}{V}&=\frac{1}{V}\left(\frac{(m'-m)z}{kmm'}+\frac{1}{m}\right)\\ &=\frac{Z}{kUV}e^{t_3}\left(e^{-t_1}-e^{-t_2}\right)+\frac{1}{UV}e^{-t_1}. \tag*{(78)} \end{aligned}

On a fixed compact box in these coordinates, every log-coordinate derivative of the first expression is Oj(U/(∣k∣E))O_j(U/(|k|E)), and every derivative of the second is

Oj(Z∣k∣UV+1UV).O_j\left(\frac{Z}{|k|UV}+\frac{1}{UV}\right).

All these quantities are bounded by fixed powers of LL after (6.15). The chain rule and the derivative bounds for ηe,ηn\eta_e,\eta_n therefore give, for each multi-index ν\nu,

∥∂νbk,Z∥∞≪νLC0(∣ν∣+1).(79)\|\partial^\nu b_{k,Z}\|_\infty\ll_\nu L^{C_0(|\nu|+1)}. \tag*{(79)}

for the pulled-back product of majorants, multiplied by fixed smooth buffers in t1,t2,t3t_1,t_2,t_3. Choose these buffers to equal one on the original m,m′m,m' dyads and on the support of the outer zz cutoff. This places bk,Zb_{k,Z} on a fixed compact box and leaves the sequence α\alpha unchanged. The majorants vanish in neighborhoods of nonpositive e/Ee/E and n/Vn/V, so extending the product by zero across those regions is smooth. Positivity in (6.18) is thereby imposed by the same cutoffs.

This is the fixed-dimensional setting of Lemma 2.4. Choose a fixed C8C_8 larger than the slope required in (6.21), and put P=LC8P=L^{C_8}. Repeated integration by parts in these three coordinates gives

∣b^k,Z(ξ)∣≪j(1+∣ξ∣/P)−j,∫R3∣b^k,Z(ξ)∣ dξ≪P3,|\widehat b_{k,Z}(\xi)|\ll_j (1+|\xi|/P)^{-j},\qquad\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}|\widehat b_{k,Z}(\xi)|\,d\xi\ll P^3,

and

∫∣ξ∣>PL∣b^k,Z(ξ)∣ dξ≪jP3L3−j.(80)\int_{|\xi|>PL}|\widehat b_{k,Z}(\xi)|\,d\xi\ll_j P^3L^{3-j}. \tag*{(80)}

Consequently the cutoffs separate into phases miξ1(m′)iξ2ziξ3m^{i\xi_1}(m')^{i\xi_2}z^{i\xi_3} at fixed logarithmic-power cost and with fixed logarithmic-power frequencies. Scalars involving UU and ZZ have modulus one.

To justify the tails absolutely, an endpoint convolution is bounded by LO(1)τ(v∗)2L^{O(1)}\tau(v_*)^2; there are at most τ3(v∗)≤τ(v∗)\tau_3(v_*)\leq\tau(v_*) triples mpr=v∗mpr=v_*. Including the bounded group weights and dropping the congruence, Cauchy–Schwarz and the fixed fourth divisor moment in Proposition 2.2 give

LO(1)∑z≍Zτ(z)2τ(z+k)2≪ZLO(1).(81)L^{O(1)}\sum_{z\asymp Z}\tau(z)^2\tau(z+k)^2\ll ZL^{O(1)}. \tag*{(81)}

Here ∣k∣≪LO(1)=o(Z)|k|\ll L^{O(1)}=o(Z) and both positions are positive. This estimate controls (6.22), after summing over all kk and ZZ, to arbitrary logarithmic accuracy by increasing jj. The fixed exponent C8C_8 need not increase with that accuracy.

Identifying the two endpoints. Fix one character in (6.19) and one retained Fourier term. Before the character and Fourier factors, the coefficient from the expanded square is

αmαm′‾ah(h)ah(h′)‾.\alpha_m\overline{\alpha_{m'}}a_h(h)\overline{a_h(h')}.

Define invariant cores, for positive integers vv, by

F0(v)=∑mpr=v∗αmχ(m)mi(ϱ−ξ2)1p∈Qj∗∗∗p−iσcr‾,F_0(v)=\sum_{mpr=v_*}\alpha_m\chi(m)m^{i(\varrho-\xi_2)}1_{p\in Q_{j***}}p^{-i\sigma\overline{c_r}},
G0(v)=∑mpr=v∗αmχ(m)mi(ξ1+ϱ)1p∈Qj∗∗∗p−iσcr‾.(82)G_0(v)=\sum_{mpr=v_*}\alpha_m\chi(m)m^{i(\xi_1+\varrho)}1_{p\in Q_{j***}}p^{-i\sigma\overline{c_r}}. \tag*{(82)}

Both cores contain the original restricted sequence α\alpha. All group primes are below WW, whereas m,m′m,m' have no prime factor at most WW. Therefore

z~∗=m′h∗,(z+k)∗=mh∗′,\widetilde{z}_*=m'h_*,\qquad(z+k)_*=mh'_*,
W1(z)=W1(h),W1(z+k)=W1(h′),ε(z)=ε(h),ε(z+k)=ε(h′).(83)W_1(z)=W_1(h),\qquad W_1(z+k)=W_1(h'),\qquad\varepsilon(z)=\varepsilon(h),\qquad\varepsilon(z+k)=\varepsilon(h'). \tag*{(83)}

Using also h=z/m′h=z/m' and h′=(z+k)/mh'=(z+k)/m, direct expansion shows that the separated sum is precisely

∑z>0z+k>0ψZ(z/Z)zi(ϱ+ξ3)(z+k)−iϱF0(z)‾G0(z+k)W1(z)W1(z+k)ε(z)ε(z+k).(84)\sum_{\substack{z>0\\z+k>0}}\psi_Z(z/Z)z^{i(\varrho+\xi_3)}(z+k)^{-i\varrho}\overline{F_0(z)}G_0(z+k)W_1(z)W_1(z+k)\varepsilon(z)\varepsilon(z+k). \tag*{(84)}

For example, conjugating the first core supplies αm‾χ(m′)‾(m′)i(ξ2−ϱ)H(h∗)\overline{\alpha_m}\overline{\chi(m')}(m')^{i(\xi_2-\varrho)}H(h_*), while the second core supplies αmχ(m)mi(ξ1+ϱ)H(h∗′)\alpha_m\chi(m)m^{i(\xi_1+\varrho)}H(h'_*). The remaining powers in (6.26) give exactly hiϱ(h′)−iϱziξ3h^{i\varrho}(h')^{-i\varrho}z^{i\xi_3}. Thus the discrepancy-bearing first core has the required coefficient α\alpha, with its conjugation occurring outside that core.

Every hypothesis of Theorem 4.1 is now satisfied. The designated slot is a prime in the fixed range (6.3); the residual coefficients are bounded by (6.12); the character modulus 2∣k∣2|k| and all frequencies have fixed logarithmic-power bounds; and the two endpoints have the same allowed sign. Finally, set

ψ~Z(t)=tψZ(t).\widetilde{\psi}_Z(t)=t\psi_Z(t).

Then ψZ(z/Z)=(Z/z)ψ~Z(z/Z)\psi_Z(z/Z)=(Z/z)\widetilde{\psi}_Z(z/Z). Consequently (6.26) is exactly ZZ times a harmonic correlation covered by that theorem. For any prescribed D0D_0 it is therefore

O(ZL−D0),(85)O(ZL^{-D_0}), \tag*{(85)}

provided the discrepancy exponent BB is chosen sufficiently large after all the fixed bounds and D0D_0.

Completing the parameter choices. Here is an explicit ordering of the choices. First fix the weight geometry, b∗b_*, D∗D_*, CC, the designated band, the allocation functions, and the cutoff. These determine the exponents

Cs, Ca, Ch, Cf, Cp, Cd′.C_s,\ C_a,\ C_h,\ C_f,\ C_p,\ C'_d.

Fix K0K_0 by (6.15). This fixes the derivative and frequency bounds after Cauchy–Schwarz, the Fourier scale PP, and exponents KkK_k, KzK_z, CsepC_{\mathrm{sep}} such that there are at most LKkL^{K_k} shifts, Z≤xLKzZ\leq xL^{K_z}, and the total post-Cauchy separation cost, including the dyads, is at most LCsepL^{C_{\mathrm{sep}}}. These exponents are all fixed.

Choose Aoff>0A_{\mathrm{off}}>0 so that

−K0+Cp−Aoff<−2(D∗+Cf+1),-K_0+C_p-A_{\mathrm{off}}<-2(D_*+C_f+1),

and then choose

D0>Aoff+Kk+Kz+Csep+2.D_0 > A_{\mathrm{off}} + K_k + K_z + C_{\mathrm{sep}} + 2.

Choose the differentiation orders in the Fourier tail estimates large enough for the same error target. Theorem 4.1 now supplies a sufficiently large fixed BB. Summing (85) over shifts, dyads, characters, and the retained Fourier integrals gives

∣Noff∣≪xL−Aoff.|\mathcal{N}_{\mathrm{off}}| \ll xL^{-A_{\mathrm{off}}}.

Together with (72), (73), and (71), this proves ∣B′∣≪xL−D∗−Cf−1|B'| \ll xL^{-D^*-C_f-1}. The total pre-Cauchy variation LCfL^{C_f} and the arbitrarily small previously discarded errors prove (6.2) for each choice of ε\varepsilon, and hence for AA.

Remark 6.2 (Precision in subsequent proxy replacements). Theorem 6.1 permits the actual interval restriction to be included in α\alpha, and it asks only for boundedness of the other coefficient. Thus it can be applied a second time after exchanging the two factors, even if the first coefficient has already been replaced by a nonsmooth bounded proxy. On O(L)O(L) contributing factor dyads, its total error is O(xL−D∗+1)O(xL^{-D^*+1}). The lower bound XA≫xL−CAX_A \gg xL^{-C_A} in Lemma 5.2 makes this o(XA/L)o(X_A/L) whenever D∗>CA+2D_* > C_A+2.

In particular, if a later proxy construction has coefficients bounded by one independently of its logarithmic cell precision S1S_1, use that coefficient bound when making all the choices above. First fix K0K_0, the shifted-correlation accuracy, and finally the discrepancy exponent BB; only afterwards choose the proxy precision S1>2B+3S_1 > 2B+3. Neither CfC_f nor the coefficient or diagonal exponents depends on S1S_1. Increasing S1S_1 therefore changes only how large xx must be and does not reopen any earlier choice.

Distribution in congruence classes

For an odd squarefree integer dd define

r(d)=∑u≥12u+1≡0(modd)A(u)Ψ(u/x)−XAφ(d).(86)r(d)=\sum_{\substack{u\geq1\\2u+1\equiv0\pmod d}} A(u)\Psi(u/x)-\frac{X_A}{\varphi(d)}. \tag*{(86)}

The following estimate supplies the distribution needed by the sieve. Its proof uses only the prime slot in Q0Q_0, the weight bounds already proved, and the classical Siegel–Walfisz and multiplicative large sieve estimates in [4].

Theorem 7.1 (Congruence distribution). For every fixed 0<ϑ<1/20<\vartheta<1/2 and D>0D>0,

∑d≤xϑd odd and squarefree∣r(d)∣≪ϑ,DxL−D+XAL−18.\sum_{\substack{d\leq x^\vartheta\\d\ \mathrm{odd\ and\ squarefree}}}|r(d)|\ll_{\vartheta,D}xL^{-D}+X_AL^{-18}.

The constants may depend on the fixed weight geometry and Ψ\Psi, but not on any later proxy precision. No effective bound on the threshold for xx is asserted.

Proof. Write Q=xϑQ=x^\vartheta and w(u)=A(u)Ψ(u/x)w(u)=A(u)\Psi(u/x). The congruence in (86) is the single unit class ad≡−2−1(modd)a_d\equiv-2^{-1}\pmod d. Character orthogonality gives the exact identity

r(d)=1φ(d)∑χ(modd)χ≠χ0χ‾(ad)∑uw(u)χ(u)−1φ(d)∑(u,d)>1w(u).(87)r(d)=\frac{1}{\varphi(d)}\sum_{\substack{\chi\pmod d\\\chi\ne\chi_0}}\overline{\chi}(a_d)\sum_u w(u)\chi(u)-\frac{1}{\varphi(d)}\sum_{(u,d)>1}w(u). \tag*{(87)}

We first bound the correction in the second term. Mertens’ estimate implies

∑h≤Qμ2(h)φ(h)≤∏p≤Q(1+1p−1)≪L.(88)\sum_{h\le Q}\frac{\mu^2(h)}{\varphi(h)}\le\prod_{p\le Q}\left(1+\frac{1}{p-1}\right)\ll L. \tag*{(88)}

For a fixed uu in the effective support of ww, we have x≤u≤2xx\le u\le2x and every prime divisor of uu is at least L20L^{20}. Writing a squarefree dd divisible by pp as phph, and then using a union bound, gives

∑d≤Qd squarefree(d,u)>11φ(d)≤∑p∣u1p−1∑h≤Qμ2(h)φ(h)≪L∑p∣u1p−1≪L−18.\sum_{\substack{d\le Q\\ d\ \mathrm{squarefree}\\ (d,u)>1}}\frac{1}{\varphi(d)} \le\sum_{p\mid u}\frac{1}{p-1}\sum_{h\le Q}\frac{\mu^2(h)}{\varphi(h)} \ll L\sum_{p\mid u}\frac{1}{p-1}\ll L^{-18}.

For the last inequality, uu has at most log⁡(2x)/(20T)\log(2x)/(20T) distinct prime divisors. Since w≥0w\ge0, the total principal correction is therefore O(XAL−18)O(X_A L^{-18}).

To treat the nonprincipal characters, delete one designated ordered slot of Q0Q_0 from the definition of aa. Retain the original divisor (r0!)jx+1(r_0!)^{j_x+1} in the resulting coefficient, denoted by aˉ−(v)\bar{a}^{-(v)}. If the residual exponents are epe_p, then

aˉ−(v)=1r0∏j=0jx∏p∈Qj1ep!≤1r0,\bar{a}^{-(v)}=\frac{1}{r_0}\prod_{j=0}^{j_x}\prod_{p\in Q_j}\frac{1}{e_p!}\le\frac{1}{r_0},

with r0−1r_0-1 slots in Q0Q_0 and r0r_0 slots in every other band, and aˉ−(v)=0\bar{a}^{-(v)}=0 off this support. Partitioning ordered tuples by the deleted prime gives, including when primes repeat,

a(v)=∑p∈Q0p∣vaˉ−(v/p).a(v)=\sum_{\substack{p\in Q_0\\p\mid v}}\bar{a}^{-(v/p)}.

The Q0Q_0-primes lie outside P\mathcal{P}, so removing that slot changes neither W1W_1 nor E\mathcal{E}. Consequently

A(u)=∑pr=up∈Q0b(r),b(r)=W1(r)1−E(r)2aˉ−(r∗),∣b(r)∣≤LB0,(89)A(u)=\sum_{\substack{pr=u\\p\in Q_0}}b(r),\qquad b(r)=W_1(r)\frac{1-\mathcal{E}(r)}{2}\bar{a}^{-(r_\ast)},\qquad |b(r)|\le L^{B_0}, \tag*{(89)}

where B0B_0 is fixed by the weight geometry.

Split p,rp,r into dyads of sizes P,RP,R. Only O(L)O(L) pairs of dyads contribute, and on these PR≍xPR\asymp x. Since xc1s′≤P≤xc2s′x^{c_1s'}\le P\le x^{c_2s'}, there is a fixed c>0c>0, depending only on (50), such that

P,R≥xcP,R\ge x^c

for every contributing pair and all sufficiently large xx. For example any c<min⁡(c1s′,1−c2s′)c<\min(c_1s',1-c_2s') suffices.

Every character modulo an odd squarefree dd is induced by a unique primitive character χf\chi_f of conductor f∣df\mid d. Write d=fhd=fh; then (f,h)=1(f,h)=1 and φ(d)=φ(f)φ(h)\varphi(d)=\varphi(f)\varphi(h). For such an induced character,

χ(pr)=χf(p)χf(r)1{(p,h)=1}1{(r,h)=1}.\chi(pr)=\chi_f(p)\chi_f(r)1_{\{(p,h)=1\}}1_{\{(r,h)=1\}}.

The nonprincipal characters have f>1f>1; there is no multiplicity in this parametrization. After applying the triangle inequality in (87), it remains to bound sums of the form

∑h≤Qh odd and squarefree1φ(h)∑1<f≤Q/hf odd and squarefree(f,h)=11φ(f)∑χf mod f∗∣∑p∈Q0, p≍Pr≍Rb(r)χf(pr)1{(pr,h)=1}Ψ(pr/x)∣.(90)\sum_{\substack{h\le Q\\ h\ \text{odd and squarefree}}}\frac{1}{\varphi(h)} \sum_{\substack{1<f\le Q/h\\ f\ \text{odd and squarefree}\\ (f,h)=1}}\frac{1}{\varphi(f)} \sum_{\chi_f\ \mathrm{mod}\ f}^{*} \left| \sum_{\substack{p\in\mathcal{Q}_0,\ p\asymp P\\ r\asymp R}} b(r)\chi_f(pr)1_{\{(pr,h)=1\}}\Psi(pr/x) \right|. \tag*{(90)}

Here and below the asterisk denotes primitive characters. Modulus restrictions may be discarded in nonnegative majorants, which will be useful when applying the large sieve.

Choose a fixed KK later, and first consider the conductors f>LKf>L^K. Put ψ(v)=Ψ(ev)\psi(v)=\Psi(e^v) and ψ^(t)=∫Rψ(v)e−itv dv\widehat{\psi}(t)=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\psi(v)e^{-itv}\,dv. Fourier inversion gives

Ψ(pr/x)=12π∫Rψ^(t)x−itpitrit dt,∫R∣ψ^(t)∣ dt≪Ψ1.\Psi(pr/x)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\mathbb{R}}\widehat{\psi}(t)x^{-it}p^{it}r^{it}\,dt,\qquad\int_{\mathbb{R}}|\widehat{\psi}(t)|\,dt\ll_{\Psi}1.

There is no frequency truncation error. For fixed h,th,t, define

Ph(χ,t)=∑p∈Q0, p≍P(p,h)=1χ(p)pit,Rh(χ,t)=∑r≤R(r,h)=1b(r)χ(r)rit.P_h(\chi,t)=\sum_{\substack{p\in\mathcal{Q}_0,\ p\asymp P\\ (p,h)=1}}\chi(p)p^{it},\qquad R_h(\chi,t)=\sum_{\substack{r\le R\\ (r,h)=1}}b(r)\chi(r)r^{it}.

Their coefficient squared norms are at most O(P)O(P) and O(RL2B0)O(RL^{2B_0}), respectively, uniformly in h,th,t. On a conductor dyad F<f≤2FF<f\le2F, Cauchy–Schwarz followed by the primitive multiplicative large sieve therefore yields

∑F<f≤2F1φ(f)∑χf mod f∗∣Ph(χf,t)Rh(χf,t)∣≪LB0F(P+F2)(R+F2)PR≪xLB0(1F+1P+1R+Fx).(91)\begin{aligned} \sum_{F<f\le2F}\frac{1}{\varphi(f)} \sum_{\chi_f\ \mathrm{mod}\ f}^{*} \left|P_h(\chi_f,t)R_h(\chi_f,t)\right| \ll\frac{L^{B_0}}{F}\sqrt{(P+F^2)(R+F^2)PR} \\ &\ll xL^{B_0}\left(\frac{1}{F}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{P}}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{R}}+\frac{F}{\sqrt{x}}\right). \tag*{(91)} \end{aligned}

Indeed 1/φ(f)≪F−1f/φ(f)1/\varphi(f)\ll F^{-1}f/\varphi(f) on this dyad, giving exactly the large sieve’s primitive-character weight. The masks 1(p,h)=1,1(r,h)=11_{(p,h)=1},1_{(r,h)=1} do not enlarge the coefficient norms.

Integrate against ∣ψ^∣|\widehat{\psi}|, sum the conductor and factor dyads, and use (88) for the remaining hh-sum. Since F≤QF\le Q, (7.5) and (91) give a total at most

xLB2(L−K+x−c/2+xϑ−1/2)xL^{B_2}\left(L^{-K}+x^{-c/2}+x^{\vartheta-1/2}\right)

for a fixed B2B_2 independent of KK. One can use dyads intersected with f>LKf>L^K, so their lower endpoints are at least LK/2L^K/2. In particular the summation over hh costs a logarithmic factor, not a factor QQ. Taking K>B2+D+2K>B_2+D+2 makes (7.8) O(xL−D)O(xL^{-D}), because ϑ<1/2\vartheta<1/2.

It remains to consider 1<f≤2LK1<f\le2L^K. For fixed r≍Rr\asymp R, apply Siegel–Walfisz to the nonprincipal character χf\chi_f on the prime interval Q0∩[P,2P)\mathcal{Q}_0\cap[P,2P). Since P≥xϑP\ge x^\vartheta, the modulus is bounded by a fixed power of log⁡P\log P. Summing the residue-class estimate against χf\chi_f and asking for a stronger initial saving absorbs the at most φ(f)\varphi(f) classes. Partial summation, using the uniformly bounded supremum and total variation of p↦Ψ(pr/x)p\mapsto\Psi(pr/x) on this interval, gives, for any fixed MM,

∑p∈Q0p≍Pχf(p)Ψ(pr/x)≪K,MPL−M.(92)\sum_{\substack{p\in\mathcal{Q}_0\\ p\asymp P}}\chi_f(p)\Psi(pr/x)\ll_{K,M}PL^{-M}. \tag*{(92)}

This use of Siegel–Walfisz includes possible exceptional real characters; its potentially ineffective constants cause no problem.

Imposing (p,h)=1(p,h)=1 deletes only O(1)O(1) terms in (92): each deleted prime is at least xcx^c, while h≤xϑh \le x^\vartheta, so there are at most ϑ/c+O(1)\vartheta/c+O(1) such primes. Thus the inner double sum in (90) is at most

RLB0(PL−M+O(1))≪xLB0−M+x1−cLB0.R L^{B_0}(P L^{-M}+O(1)) \ll x L^{B_0-M}+x^{1-c}L^{B_0}.

The other mask, (r,h)=1(r,h)=1, only decreases this absolute bound. For the small conductors,

∑1<f≤2LK1φ(f)∑χf mod f∗1≪LK.\sum_{1<f\le2L^K}\frac{1}{\varphi(f)}\sum_{\chi_f\bmod f}^{*}1\ll L^K.

Combining this with (88) and the number of factor dyads bounds the small-conductor contribution by

xLB3+K−M+x1−cLB3+KxL^{B_3+K-M}+x^{1-c}L^{B_3+K}

for a fixed B3B_3 independent of K,MK,M. Choose M>B3+K+D+2M>B_3+K+D+2. Equation (7.10) is then O(xL−D)O(xL^{-D}). Together with the large-conductor estimate and the principal correction, this proves the theorem.

Prime extraction

Put Nu=2u+1N_u=2u+1 and ax(u)=A(u)Ψ(u/x)a_x(u)=A(u)\Psi(u/x), so that ax(u)≥0a_x(u)\ge0 and XA=∑uax(u)X_A=\sum_u a_x(u). Throughout this section the band geometry, the even integer r0r_0, the damping q0=1/2q_0=1/2, and Ψ\Psi are the fixed data of the weight construction. In particular, Lemma 5.2 gives

XA≍xLHQHP,XA≫xL−CA,HP≥1.X_A\asymp\frac{x}{L}H_QH_P,\qquad X_A\gg xL^{-C_A},\qquad H_P\ge1.

We use the Type II and congruence distribution results proved above, together with the following explicitly stated sieve and proxy inputs.

Sieve and proxy inputs

Lemma 8.1 (Block sieve, imported). Consider finitely many objects with nonnegative weights and, at some primes p≤zp\le z, designated bad conditions. Suppose that for every squarefree product dd of these primes, including d=1d=1, the weight on which all conditions indexed by p∣dp\mid d hold is Xg(d)+r(d)Xg(d)+r(d). Here X≥0X\ge0, gg is multiplicative, and, for fixed η0>0\eta_0>0 and CC, one has

0≤g(p)≤1−η0,∑w<p≤w2g(p)≤C(w>1).0\le g(p)\le1-\eta_0,\qquad\sum_{w<p\le w^2}g(p)\le C\quad(w>1).

For every sufficiently large even integer hh, the weight avoiding all the bad conditions equals

X∏p≤z(1−g(p))(1+O(e−h))+O(∑d≤z4h+2d squarefree∣r(d)∣).(93)X\prod_{p\le z}(1-g(p))(1+O(e^{-h}))+ O\left(\sum_{\substack{d\le z^{4h+2}\\d\ \mathrm{squarefree}}}|r(d)|\right). \tag*{(93)}

The products and sums use only the designated primes. Constants depend only on the two density bounds, and are uniform when hh grows. For h=2h=2 there is an upper bound by a fixed constant times the displayed main term, plus the same remainder sum.

The upper and lower inclusion–exclusion polynomials have coefficients of absolute value at most one, supported on squarefree d≤z4h+2d \le z^{4h+2}. The upper polynomial is nonnegative. Its overcount is bounded by the nonnegative difference between the upper and lower polynomials; that difference also has coefficients of absolute value at most one and the same support bound.

This is the Block sieve, Lemma 2.9 of [4]. Its coefficient bound, its growing-hh uniformity, and its fixed-depth upper bound will each be used below. No sieve assertion about the present weight is included in the import: its required remainder estimates come from Theorem 7.1 or from the explicit box count below.

Define

V(y)=∏p≤y(1−1/p),V1(y)=∏3≤p≤y(1−1/(p−1)),V(y)=\prod_{p\le y}(1-1/p),\qquad V_1(y)=\prod_{3\le p\le y}(1-1/(p-1)),
S=2∏p≥3(1−1(p−1)2)>0.(94)\mathfrak{S}=2\prod_{p\ge3}\left(1-\frac{1}{(p-1)^2}\right)>0. \tag*{(94)}

Mertens’ estimate and the convergent quotient product give

V(y)∼e−γElog⁡y,V1(y)∼SV(y),(95)V(y)\sim\frac{e^{-\gamma_E}}{\log y},\qquad V_1(y)\sim\mathfrak{S}V(y), \tag*{(95)}

where γE\gamma_E is Euler’s constant.

Here are the proxy estimates we use. For the moment let 0<κ<1/500<\kappa<1/50 and 0<b1<1/2−κ0<b_1<1/2-\kappa be arbitrary fixed numbers, and let (γ,γ′](\gamma,\gamma'] range over a fixed finite partition of (b1,1/2−κ](b_1,1/2-\kappa]. On [xb1/4,x1−b1/4][x^{b_1/4},x^{1-b_1/4}] consider the tests

Ipr(m)=1m prime,Iγ(m)=1P−(m)>xγ.I_{\mathrm{pr}}(m)=\mathbf{1}_{m\ \mathrm{prime}},\qquad I_\gamma(m)=\mathbf{1}_{P^{-}(m)>x^\gamma}.

For a fixed precision S1>0S_1>0, partition the logarithmic axis into cells of width ΔL=L−S1\Delta_L=L^{-S_1}. On every full cell CY=(Y,eΔLY]C_Y=(Y,e^{\Delta_L}Y] meeting the ambient interval, put

cI(CY)=∑m∈CYI(m)#{m∈CY:P−(m)>W},BI(m)=cI(CY)1P−(m)>W(m∈CY).(96)c_I(C_Y)=\frac{\sum_{m\in C_Y}I(m)}{\#\{m\in C_Y:P^{-}(m)>W\}},\qquad B_I(m)=c_I(C_Y)\mathbf{1}_{P^{-}(m)>W}\quad(m\in C_Y). \tag*{(96)}

Even if a later factor range cuts a cell, both counts in this definition are taken on the full cell. Range restrictions are applied only after the ratio has been defined.

Lemma 8.2 (Proxy estimates, imported). For sufficiently large xx, the denominators in (96) are positive and 0≤cI≤10\le c_I\le1. For every fixed B>0B>0, every fixed S1>2B+3S_1>2B+3, and every interval KK inside a dyad in the stated factor ranges, the sequence

αm=(I(m)−BI(m))1m∈K\alpha_m=(I(m)-B_I(m))\mathbf{1}_{m\in K}

vanishes outside P−(m)>WP^{-}(m)>W, has absolute value at most one, and satisfies

∣∑m∈Jαmχ(m)m−1+it∣≤L−B\left|\sum_{m\in J}\alpha_m\chi(m)m^{-1+it}\right|\le L^{-B}

for every interval J⊂[1,x2]J\subset[1,x^2], every Dirichlet character of modulus at most LBL^B, and every ∣t∣≤LB|t|\le L^B.

Write

Bκ=[x1/2−2κ,x1/2+2κ].\mathcal{B}_\kappa=[x^{1/2-2\kappa},x^{1/2+2\kappa}].

There is an absolute constant CprC_{\mathrm{pr}} such that

cpr(m)≤CprLV(W)(m∈Bκ).(97)c_{\mathrm{pr}}(m) \le\frac{C_{\mathrm{pr}}}{LV(W)} \qquad(m \in\mathcal{B}_{\kappa}). \tag*{(97)}

The constant is independent of κ\kappa and S1S_1; the threshold for xx may depend on all fixed parameters. For w>γ>0w > \gamma> 0, set

Dγ(w)=1w+∑l≥21l!∑ti≥γ (1≤i<l)∑i<lti≤w−γ∏i<l(dti/ti)w−∑i<lti.(98)D_{\gamma}(w)=\frac{1}{w}+\sum_{l\ge2}\frac{1}{l!}\sum_{\substack{t_i\ge\gamma\ (1\le i<l)\\ \sum_{i<l}t_i\le w-\gamma}}\frac{\prod_{i<l}(dt_i/t_i)}{w-\sum_{i<l}t_i}. \tag*{(98)}

This sum is locally finite and nonnegative, and is jointly continuous on compact subsets of w>γ>0w>\gamma>0, including the thresholds w=lγw=l\gamma. If mn=Numn=Nu on the support of Ψ(u/x)\Psi(u/x) and log⁡n/L∈(γ,γ′]\log n/L\in(\gamma,\gamma'], then

cγ(m)≤sup⁡γ≤t≤γ′Dγ(1−t)+o(1)LV(W).(99)c_{\gamma}(m)\le\frac{\sup_{\gamma\le t\le\gamma'}D_{\gamma}(1-t)+o(1)}{LV(W)}. \tag*{(99)}

Here the parameters are restricted to a compact subset of w>γ>0w>\gamma>0, as holds for the bins under consideration. For fixed sufficiently small b>0b>0,

∫b1/2Dα(1−α)dαα=Db(1)−1,(100)\int_b^{1/2}D_{\alpha}(1-\alpha)\frac{d\alpha}{\alpha}=D_b(1)-1, \tag*{(100)}
Db(1)≤e−γEb(1+O(e−c/b))(101)D_b(1)\le\frac{e^{-\gamma_E}}{b}\left(1+O(e^{-c/b})\right) \tag*{(101)}

with an absolute c>0c>0. The endpoint of the integral is interpreted by its left limit.

The discrepancy assertion and the density assertions are, respectively, Lemmas 7.3 and 7.4 of [4], in the section “Extracting primes with smooth predecessors.” These results concern ordinary integer cells; their hypotheses contain no candidate weight. In particular they apply to the present AA. The exact bound cI≤1c_I\le1 also follows directly because each test selects a subset of the WW-rough integers in its cell. Thus the coefficient bounds of both BIB_I and I−BII-B_I do not depend on the precision S1S_1. In (8.9),

log⁡mL=1−log⁡nL+O(1/L),log⁡mL−γ≥2κ+O(1/L),\frac{\log m}{L}=1-\frac{\log n}{L}+O(1/L),\qquad\frac{\log m}{L}-\gamma\ge2\kappa+O(1/L),

which verifies the required separation from w=γw=\gamma. Every little-oh assertion in the proxy estimates is taken only after its parameters have been fixed.

A uniform positive pair bound

We first prove an upper bound that uses only the original weight geometry. This establishes the constant needed to choose κ\kappa without referring to b1b_1, the Type II discrepancy exponent, or the eventual proxy precision.

Choose a sufficiently large fixed integer j′j' and a fixed θ\theta in the gap

c2S′2−j′<θ<c1S′2−j′+1,10θ≤120,∑j≥j′r0c2S′2−j≤125.(102)c_2S'2^{-j'}<\theta<c_1S'2^{-j'+1},\qquad10\theta\le\frac{1}{20},\qquad\sum_{j\ge j'}r_0c_2S'2^{-j}\le\frac{1}{25}. \tag*{(102)}

Such choices exist because c2<2c1c_2<2c_1, and all endpoints decrease geometrically. Call QjQ_j with j≥j′j\ge j' the micro bands and those with j<j′j<j' the macro bands.

Lemma 8.3 (Assignment and mask majorant). An assignment aa consists of the complete ordered r0r_0-tuples in all the micro bands and one prime mark from each Pg\mathcal{P}_g. Let D1=D1(a)D_1 = D_1(a) be their product, with multiplicities retained, and put

λa=∏j=j′jx1r0!∏gVg−1.\lambda_a=\prod_{j=j'}^{j_x}\frac{1}{r_0!}\prod_g V_g^{-1}.

For sufficiently large xx,

D1≤x1/20,∑aλaD1≪HQ,∑aλa≪x1/20HQ.(103)D_1\le x^{1/20},\qquad\sum_a\frac{\lambda_a}{D_1}\ll H_Q,\qquad\sum_a\lambda_a\ll x^{1/20}H_Q. \tag*{(103)}

For each assignment, ban every odd non-P\mathcal{P} prime at most xθx^\theta not dividing D1D_1, and independently ban each P\mathcal{P} prime not dividing D1D_1 with probability 1−q01-q_0. With expectation over this finite random mask,

A(u)≤A0(u)≤∑aλa1D1∣uE1u is divisible by no banned prime.(104)A(u)\le A_0(u)\le\sum_a\lambda_a1_{D_1\mid u}\mathbb{E}1_u\text{ is divisible by no banned prime}. \tag*{(104)}

The constants in (8.13) depend only on the fixed weight geometry and j′j'.

Proof. The product of the micro entries is at most x1/25x^{1/25} by (8.12). There are O(T)O(T) marks and every mark is at most exp⁡(L2/5)\exp(L^{2/5}), so their product is exp⁡(O(TL2/5))=xo(1)\exp(O(TL^{2/5}))=x^{o(1)}. This proves the asserted bound for D1D_1, including assignments with repeated micro entries. Write

HQmic=∏j=j′jx1r0!(∑p∈Qj1p)r0.H_Q^{\mathrm{mic}}=\prod_{j=j'}^{j_x}\frac{1}{r_0!}\left(\sum_{p\in Q_j}\frac{1}{p}\right)^{r_0}.

Summing the reciprocal product of the marks gives ∏g(Vg−1∑p∈Pgp−1)=1\prod_g(V_g^{-1}\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}p^{-1})=1. Consequently ∑aλa/D1=HQmic≪HQ\sum_a\lambda_a/D_1=H_Q^{\mathrm{mic}}\ll H_Q: only finitely many fixed band factors, bounded above and below, have been omitted from HQH_Q. The last assertion in (8.13) follows by multiplying by the bound for D1D_1.

To prove the majorant, fix uu with A0(u)>0A_0(u)>0 and a compatible choice of ordered micro entries and marks. The band gap in (8.12) implies that all non-P\mathcal{P} prime factors of uu below xθx^\theta are among these micro entries, whereas every macro prime exceeds xθx^\theta. All group primes are below xθx^\theta for sufficiently large xx. The only random survival conditions are therefore at the distinct unmarked group-prime divisors of uu. There are exactly ωP(u)−sP\omega_{\mathcal{P}}(u)-s_{\mathcal{P}} of them, so the survival probability is q0ωP(u)−sPq_0^{\omega_{\mathcal{P}}(u)-s_{\mathcal{P}}}, even when marked or unmarked primes occur to higher powers.

Summing one mark per group with normalization ∏gVg−1\prod_g V_g^{-1} recovers the factor W1(u)W_1(u). For a fixed prime multiset in any band, the number of ordered r0r_0-tuples divided by r0!r_0! is 1/∏pvp!≤11/\prod_p v_p!\le1. Summing the normalized compatible micro lists retains their exact contribution to a(u∗)a(u_*); dropping the remaining macro-list contribution can only increase it. Thus the compatible assignments already dominate A0(u)A_0(u). Incompatible assignments contribute nonnegative terms, proving (8.14). □\square

Lemma 8.4 (Positive dyadic pair estimate). There is a constant CboxC_{\mathrm{box}}, depending only on the fixed weight data and the choices in (8.12), such that, on every dyadic box with M1M2≍xM_1M_2\asymp x and Mi≪x0.54M_i\ll x^{0.54},

∑M1≤m<2M1, M2≤n<2M2mn=Nu, P−(m),P−(n)>Wax(u)≤CboxXAV(W)2.(105)\sum_{\substack{M_1\le m<2M_1,\ M_2\le n<2M_2\\ mn=N_u,\ P^-(m),P^-(n)>W}}a_x(u)\le C_{\mathrm{box}}X_AV(W)^2. \tag*{(105)}

The fixed constants in the size comparisons can be taken to cover all boxes meeting mn=2u+1mn=2u+1 with u∈[x,2x]u\in[x,2x].

Proof. Use Lemma 8.3 and bound Ψ\Psi by its fixed supremum. Fix an assignment and a mask. Since D1D_1 is odd, D1∣uD_1 \mid u implies mn≡1(modD1)mn \equiv1 \pmod{D_1}. We count all pairs in the box with this congruence, dropping both the parity of mnmn and the remaining support restriction on uu.

For every odd prime l≤xθl \le x^\theta not dividing D1D_1, impose the bad condition mn≡0(modl)mn \equiv0 \pmod l when l≤Wl \le W, and the bad condition mn≡1(modl)mn \equiv1 \pmod l when ll is banned. There are 2l−12l-1 pairs of residues with product zero and l−1l-1 with product one; the two sets are disjoint. Hence the local number and density of bad residue pairs are

ν(l)=(2l−1)1l≤W+(l−1)1l banned,g(l)=ν(l)l2.(106)\nu(l)=(2l-1)\mathbf{1}_{l\le W}+(l-1)\mathbf{1}_{l\ \mathrm{banned}},\qquad g(l)=\frac{\nu(l)}{l^2}. \tag*{(106)}

In particular g(l)≤7/9g(l)\le7/9 and g(l)≤3/lg(l)\le3/l. These give uniform density hypotheses for Lemma 8.1, independent of the assignment and mask.

There are exactly φ(D1)\varphi(D_1) residue pairs with product one modulo D1D_1: choose the first unit and then its unique inverse. This statement does not require D1D_1 to be squarefree. For a squarefree dd built from the sieving primes, the Chinese remainder theorem gives exactly φ(D1)ν(d)\varphi(D_1)\nu(d) pairs modulo D1dD_1d, where ν\nu is multiplicative. Each pair of classes contributes

M1M2(D1d)2+O(1+M1+M2D1d).\frac{M_1M_2}{(D_1d)^2}+O\left(1+\frac{M_1+M_2}{D_1d}\right).

Thus the base mass is M1M2φ(D1)/D12M_1M_2\varphi(D_1)/D_1^2, with local density g(d)g(d). Since ν(d)≤dτ(d)2\nu(d)\le d\tau(d)^2, the lattice remainders satisfy

∣ra(d)∣≪τ(d)2{M1+M2+D1d}.|r_a(d)|\ll\tau(d)^2\{M_1+M_2+D_1d\}.

Use the h=2h=2 upper bound in Lemma 8.1, whose level is D=(xθ)10D=(x^\theta)^{10}. Fixed divisor-moment bounds give

∑d≤D∣ra(d)∣≪LC0{(M1+M2)D+D1D2}.(107)\sum_{d\le D}|r_a(d)|\ll L^{C_0}\{(M_1+M_2)D+D_1D^2\}. \tag*{(107)}

for a fixed C0C_0. This includes d=1d=1 and is uniform in the mask.

We next compare the sieve product with Mertens products. For l≤Wl\le W banned by the mask, its factor is 1−3/l+2/l21-3/l+2/l^2; for an allowed l≤Wl\le W it is (1−1/l)2(1-1/l)^2. For W<l≤xθW<l\le x^\theta outside D1D_1, all primes are non-group primes and banned, and the factor is 1−1/l+1/l21-1/l+1/l^2. Comparing these factors, allowing a convergent product of 1+O(l−2)1+O(l^{-2}) and the fixed factor at 22, gives

∏3≤l≤xθl∤D1(1−g(l))≪V(W)2V(xθ)∏l∣D1(1−1/l)∏l∈P, l∤D1l allowed(1−1/l)−3.(108)\prod_{\substack{3\le l\le x^\theta\\l\nmid D_1}}(1-g(l)) \ll\frac{V(W)^2V(x^\theta)}{\prod_{l\mid D_1}(1-1/l)} \prod_{\substack{l\in\mathcal P,\ l\nmid D_1\\l\ \mathrm{allowed}}}(1-1/l)^{-3}. \tag*{(108)}

Every prime dividing D1D_1 is at least L20L^{20}, and log⁡D1=O(L)\log D_1=O(L), so

∑l∣D11l≪L−19log⁡L.\sum_{l\mid D_1}\frac{1}{l}\ll\frac{L^{-19}}{\log L}.

Its correction product in (8.18) is therefore uniformly bounded. Independence of the mask gives

Ea∏l∈P, l∤D1l allowed(1−1/l)−1=∏l∈Pl∤D1(1+q0l−1)≤∏l∈P(1+q0l−1)≤HP.\mathbb{E}_a\prod_{\substack{l\in\mathcal P,\ l\nmid D_1\\l\ \mathrm{allowed}}}(1-1/l)^{-1} =\prod_{\substack{l\in\mathcal P\\l\nmid D_1}}\left(1+\frac{q_0}{l-1}\right) \le\prod_{l\in\mathcal P}\left(1+\frac{q_0}{l-1}\right)\le H_{\mathcal P}.

For the last inequality, the group factor in HPH_P is

∏p∈Pg(1+q0p−1)1Vg∑p∈Pg1p−1+q0.\prod_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}\left(1+\frac{q_0}{p-1}\right)\frac{1}{V_g}\sum_{p\in\mathcal{P}_g}\frac{1}{p-1+q_0}.

and the final factor is at least one.

Since ϕ(D1)/D12≤1/D1\phi(D_1)/D_1^2\le1/D_1, summing the main term over assignments with Lemma 8.3 gives

≪xV(W)2V(xθ)HQHP≪XAV(W)2.(109)\ll xV(W)^2V(x^\theta)H_QH_P\ll X_AV(W)^2. \tag*{(109)}

Here V(xθ)≍L−1V(x^\theta)\asymp L^{-1}, with θ\theta already fixed, and we used (8.1). It remains essential to sum the errors over assignments as well. From (8.13),

∑aλaD1≤x1/10O(HQ).\sum_a\lambda_aD_1\le x^{1/10}O(H_Q).

Since D≤x1/20D\le x^{1/20} and Mi≪x0.54M_i\ll x^{0.54},

∑aλa∑d≤D∣ra(d)∣≪LC0HQ{x1/20(M1+M2)D+x1/10D2}≪LC0HQ(x0.64+x0.20)=o(XAV(W)2).(110)\begin{aligned} \sum_a\lambda_a\sum_{d\le D}|r_a(d)|\ll L^{C_0}H_Q\{x^{1/20}(M_1+M_2)D+x^{1/10}D^2\} \\ &\ll L^{C_0}H_Q(x^{0.64}+x^{0.20})=o(X_AV(W)^2). \tag*{(110)} \end{aligned}

Indeed XAV(W)2≍xHQHP/L2X_AV(W)^2\asymp xH_QH_P/L^2 and HP≥1H_P\ge1. This proves (8.15). Every constant used here depends only on the original weight data and j′,θj',\theta.

For later use, a dyadic decomposition of Bκ\mathcal{B}_\kappa and Lemma 8.4 imply

Rκ:=∑mn=Nu, m,n∈BκP−(m),P−(n)>WaX(u)≤C1(κL+1)XAV(W)2.(111)R_\kappa:=\sum_{\substack{mn=N u,\ m,n\in\mathcal{B}_\kappa\\ P^-(m),P^-(n)>W}}a_X(u)\le C_1(\kappa L+1)X_AV(W)^2. \tag*{(111)}

There are O(κL+1)O(\kappa L+1) first-factor dyads because the interval has logarithmic length 4κL4\kappa L, and only O(1)O(1) second-factor dyads per first-factor dyad because mn∈[2x+1,4x+1]mn\in[2x+1,4x+1]. Enlarging partially intersected boxes is legitimate by positivity. For κ<1/50\kappa<1/50 all their sides are O(x0.54)O(x^{0.54}). Consequently C1C_1 is independent of κ\kappa, b1b_1, S1S_1. Fix, at this point, the constant

Cbal=Cpr2C1,(112)C_{\mathrm{bal}}=C_{\mathrm{pr}}^2C_1, \tag*{(112)}

enlarging it if necessary to absorb the fixed dyadic conventions.

Parameter choice and test replacement

Choose 0<κ<1/500<\kappa<1/50 so small that

Cbalκ<S/4.(113)C_{\mathrm{bal}}\kappa<\mathfrak{S}/4. \tag*{(113)}

Next choose b1>0b_1>0 sufficiently small, with b1<1/100b_1<1/100, to satisfy the presieve and subtraction conditions below. The constants in those conditions do not depend on a later proxy precision. Set

ϑ=12−κ2,b∗=b1/3.\vartheta=\frac{1}{2}-\frac{\kappa}{2},\qquad b_* = b_1/3.

By continuity in Lemma 8.2, a sufficiently fine fixed partition of (b1,1/2−κ](b_1,1/2-\kappa] satisfies

∑(γ,γ′]sup⁡γ≤t≤γ′Dγ(1−t)log⁡(γ′/γ)≤Db1(1)−1+110.(114)\sum_{(\gamma,\gamma']}\sup_{\gamma\le t\le\gamma'}D_\gamma(1-t)\log(\gamma'/\gamma)\le D_{b_1}(1)-1+\frac{1}{10}. \tag*{(114)}

In fact these sums converge to ∫b11/2−κDα(1−α) dα/α\int_{b_1}^{1/2-\kappa}D_\alpha(1-\alpha)\,d\alpha/\alpha: on this fixed compact range, replacing γ\gamma and tt by the same point changes the continuous integrand uniformly by a quantity tending to zero with the mesh. Positivity and (8.10) then give (8.24).

Prescribe a Type II saving D∗>CA+4D_\ast>C_A+4 and a congruence saving Dcg>CA+4D_{\rm cg}>C_A+4. Apply Theorem 6.1 with b∗b_\ast and coefficient bound one, obtaining its required fixed discrepancy exponent BB. Only now fix S1>2B+3S_1>2B+3 and define the proxies by (8.5). All these parameters, including any prime number theorem accuracies in the proxy inputs, are fixed before xx tends to infinity.

Lemma 8.5 (Replacement on the required factor ranges). In all factor sums used below, a test II on either factor of mn=Numn=N_u can be replaced by BIB_I with total error o(XA/L)o(X_A/L), provided the coefficient on the other factor has absolute value at most one. This holds also when that other coefficient is a proxy.

Proof. For the unbalanced sums, the prime factor nn is in (xb1,x1/2−κ](x^{b_1},x^{1/2-\kappa}], and the complementary factor lies between fixed positive multiples of x1/2+κx^{1/2+\kappa} and x1−b1x^{1-b_1}. For the balanced sums both factors are in BκB_\kappa. Thus every contributing factor dyad, after intersecting with its actual interval, has scale between xb1/3x^{b_1/3} and x1−b1/3x^{1-b_1/3} for sufficiently large xx. The actual factor ranges also lie inside the ambient proxy interval. The fixed gaps in these exponent inequalities absorb all dyadic endpoint constants.

On a dyad use (I−BI)1K(I-B_I)1_K as the first sequence in Theorem 6.1, where KK is the actual summation interval. Lemma 8.2 supplies its rough support, coefficient bound, and discrepancy. Exchange the factor names when the test is on the second factor. The theorem requires only boundedness of the companion sequence, so a nonsmooth proxy is permitted. There are O(L)O(L) contributing dyadic pairs for each of the fixed finitely many tests. The total error is therefore O(xL−D∗+1)=o(XA/L)O(xL^{-D_\ast+1})=o(X_A/L) by (8.1). The full-cell normalization is retained when KK cuts a cell. In particular, neither BB nor the coefficient exponent used in the Type II theorem depends on S1S_1.

Presieving and unbalanced composites

For odd squarefree dd write, as in the congruence theorem,

r(d)=∑d∣Nuax(u)−XAφ(d).r(d)=\sum_{d\mid N_u}a_x(u)-\frac{X_A}{\varphi(d)}.

Theorem 7.1, with the already fixed ϑ\vartheta, DcgD_{\rm cg}, gives

∑d≤xϑd odd and squarefree∣r(d)∣≪xL−Dcg+XAL−18=o(XA/L).(115)\sum_{\substack{d\le x^\vartheta\\ d\ \mathrm{odd\ and\ squarefree}}}|r(d)|\ll xL^{-D_{\rm cg}}+X_A L^{-18}=o(X_A/L). \tag*{(115)}

Lemma 8.6 (Initial sifted mass). For sufficiently small fixed b1b_1,

∑P−(Nu)>xb1ax(u)≥SXAL{e−γEb1(1−O(e−c/b1))+o(1)}.(116)\sum_{P^-(N_u)>x^{b_1}}a_x(u)\ge\frac{\mathfrak{S}X_A}{L}\left\{\frac{e^{-\gamma E}}{b_1}\left(1-O\left(e^{-c/b_1}\right)\right)+o(1)\right\}. \tag*{(116)}

Proof. Apply Lemma 8.1 to the nonnegative weights ax(u)a_x(u), with bad condition p∣Nup\mid N_u at odd primes p≤z=xb1p\le z=x^{b_1}. Its density is g(p)=1/(p−1)g(p)=1/(p-1), at most 1/21/2; the sums of these densities over (w,w2](w,w^2] are bounded. Take

h=2⌈140b1⌉.h=2\left\lceil\frac{1}{40b_1}\right\rceil.

Making b1b_1 small ensures that this even integer is sufficiently large for the two-sided sieve. Its level satisfies

b1(4h+2)≤15+2b1<ϑ.b_1(4h+2)\le\frac{1}{5}+2b_1<\vartheta.

Thus (115) supplies the full remainder sum. Since NuN_u is odd, avoiding the specified odd primes is exactly P−(Nu)>xb1P^-(N_u)>x^{b_1}. Finally use (95) and e−h=O(e−c/b1)e^{-h}=O(e^{-c/b_1}) in (93).

Lemma 8.7 (Conditional small-prime sieve). For each fixed bin (γ,γ′](\gamma,\gamma'] of the chosen partition,

∑xγ<n≤xγ′n prime ∑n∣NuP−(Nu)>Wax(u)=XAV1(W){log⁡(γ′/γ)+o(1)}.(117)\sum_{\substack{x^\gamma<n\le x^{\gamma'}\\ n\ \mathrm{prime}}} \ \sum_{\substack{n\mid N_u\\ P^-(N_u)>W}} a_x(u) = X_A V_1(W)\{\log(\gamma'/\gamma)+o(1)\}. \tag*{(117)}

Proof. Fix such a prime nn. For each odd squarefree dd supported on primes at most WW, one has n>Wn>W for sufficiently large xx, and

∑nd∣Nuax(u)=XA(n−1)ϕ(d)+r(nd).\sum_{nd\mid N_u}a_x(u)=\frac{X_A}{(n-1)\phi(d)}+r(nd).

Apply Lemma 8.1 on the objects with n∣Nun\mid N_u, using base mass XA/(n−1)X_A/(n-1), local density 1/(p−1)1/(p-1), and h=2⌈T2⌉h=2\lceil T^2\rceil. Its stated growing-hh uniformity applies; the level for dd is

DW=W4h+2=exp⁡(O(LT2))=xo(1).D_W=W^{4h+2}=\exp(O(\sqrt{L}T^2))=x^{o(1)}.

Every product ndnd used is at most x1/2−κ+o(1)<xϑx^{1/2-\kappa+o(1)}<x^\vartheta.

Crucially, the map (n,d)↦nd(n,d)\mapsto nd is injective, since nn is the unique prime divisor of ndnd exceeding WW. This remains true when the sums are taken over all the disjoint bins. The sieve polynomials have coefficients of absolute value at most one, so the sum of the remainders over all nn and dd is bounded by the single sum (115), with no divisor multiplicity. It is o(XAV1(W))o(X_A V_1(W)), since V1(W)≍L−1/2V_1(W)\asymp L^{-1/2}. The main terms are

XAV1(W)(1+O(e−h))∑xγ<n≤xγ′n prime1n−1.X_A V_1(W)(1+O(e^{-h})) \sum_{\substack{x^\gamma<n\le x^{\gamma'}\\ n\ \mathrm{prime}}}\frac{1}{n-1}.

Partial summation from the prime number theorem gives the last sum as log⁡(γ′/γ)+o(1)\log(\gamma'/\gamma)+o(1), proving the result.

Lemma 8.8 (Removal of unbalanced composites). The weight of prime values NuN_u, together with composite values whose least prime factor exceeds x1/2−κx^{1/2-\kappa}, is at least

SXA2L(118)\frac{\mathfrak{S}X_A}{2L} \tag*{(118)}

for sufficiently large xx after b1b_1 is chosen sufficiently small.

Proof. If a presieved composite has least prime factor n∈(xγ,xγ′]n\in(x^\gamma,x^{\gamma'}], every prime factor of m=Nu/nm=N_u/n is at least n>xγn>x^\gamma. This includes a repeated occurrence of nn. Its weight is therefore bounded above by the sum over mn=Numn=N_u of Iγ(m)1xγ<n≤xγ′, n primeax(u)I_\gamma(m)1_{x^\gamma<n\le x^{\gamma'},\,n\ \mathrm{prime}}a_x(u). Other divisors counted by this sum merely increase the upper bound.

Replace IγI_\gamma by BγB_\gamma using Lemma 8.5, and use (99). Because n>Wn>W, P−(m)>WP^-(m)>W is equivalent to P−(Nu)>WP^-(N_u)>W; no coprimality between mm and nn is needed. Lemma 8.7 and (95) bound the weight removed for this bin by

SXAL{sup⁡γ≤t≤γ′Dγ(1−t)log⁡(γ′/γ)+o(1)},\frac{\mathfrak{S}X_A}{L} \left\{ \sup_{\gamma\le t\le\gamma'} D_\gamma(1-t)\log(\gamma'/\gamma)+o(1) \right\},

apart from the total o(XA/L)o(X_A/L) replacement error. Summing over the fixed mesh and using (8.24) bounds the total removed weight by

SXAL{Db1(1)−1+1/10+o(1)}.\frac{\mathcal{S}X_A}{L}\{D_{b_1}(1)-1+1/10+o(1)\}.

Subtract this from Lemma 8.6. By (8.11), the coefficient of SXA/L\mathcal{S}X_A/L left over is at least

1−110−O(b1−1e−c/b1)+o(1).1-\frac{1}{10}-O(b_1^{-1}e^{-c/b_1})+o(1).

Choose b1b_1 so small that this is greater than 1/21/2 for sufficiently large xx. This choice also satisfies the initial sieve conditions. The surviving presieved values are exactly among the two classes in the assertion, so their weight proves (8.28).

Balanced composites and the conclusion

Lemma 8.9 (Balanced composite bound). With the constant fixed in (8.22), the weight of composite NuN_u with P−(Nu)>x1/2−κP^{-}(N_u)>x^{1/2-\kappa} is at most

Cbal(κ+1/L)XAL+o(XA/L).(119)C_{\mathrm{bal}}(\kappa+1/L)\frac{X_A}{L}+o(X_A/L). \tag*{(119)}

Proof. Such a composite has exactly two prime factors counted with multiplicity: three would give Nu>x3(1/2−κ)>4x+1N_u>x^{3(1/2-\kappa)}>4x+1. Both factors lie in BκB_\kappa for sufficiently large xx, since the larger one is at most (4x+1)x−1/2+κ<x1/2+2κ(4x+1)x^{-1/2+\kappa}<x^{1/2+2\kappa}. Ordered prime pairs cover every such composite at least once; distinct primes give two pairs and a repeated prime gives one. Thus their total weight is bounded by

∑mn=Num,n∈BκIpr(m)Ipr(n)ax(u).\sum_{\substack{mn=N_u\\m,n\in B_\kappa}} I_{\mathrm{pr}}(m)I_{\mathrm{pr}}(n)a_x(u).

Use the exact identity

Ipr(m)Ipr(n)−Bpr(m)Bpr(n)=(Ipr−Bpr)(m)Ipr(n)+Bpr(m)(Ipr−Bpr)(n).I_{\mathrm{pr}}(m)I_{\mathrm{pr}}(n)-B_{\mathrm{pr}}(m)B_{\mathrm{pr}}(n) =(I_{\mathrm{pr}}-B_{\mathrm{pr}})(m)I_{\mathrm{pr}}(n)+B_{\mathrm{pr}}(m)(I_{\mathrm{pr}}-B_{\mathrm{pr}})(n).

Lemma 8.5 applies to the two terms in turn, exchanging factor roles in the second. Both companion sequences have absolute value at most one, independently of S1S_1. The resulting positive proxy sum is, by (8.7), at most

Cpr2L2V(W)2∑mn=Nu, m,n∈BκP−(m),P−(n)>Wax(u).(120)\frac{C_{\mathrm{pr}}^2}{L^2V(W)^2} \sum_{\substack{mn=N_u,\ m,n\in B_\kappa\\P^{-}(m),P^{-}(n)>W}}a_x(u). \tag*{(120)}

Apply (8.21) and (8.22), and add the o(XA/L)o(X_A/L) replacement error. This proves (8.29).

Proof of Theorem 1.1. Combining Lemmas 8.8 and 8.9 gives

∑Nu primeax(u)≥(S2−Cbalκ−o(1))XAL≫XAL,\sum_{N_u\ \mathrm{prime}}a_x(u)\geq\left(\frac{\mathcal{S}}{2}-C_{\mathrm{bal}}\kappa-o(1)\right)\frac{X_A}{L}\gg\frac{X_A}{L},

by (8.23). Lemma 5.3 removes only o(XA/L)o(X_A/L) from this mass. Consequently there is a supported uu with 2u+12u+1 prime and 2u2u squarefree.

For completeness, the support condition counts prime factors with their multiplicities. The ordinary part u∗u_* has r0(jx+1)r_0(j_x+1) prime factors, an even number because r0r_0 is even. The factor (1−E(u))/2(1-\mathcal{E}(u))/2 in A(u)A(u) imposes an odd total multiplicity on the group-prime part. Hence Ω(u)\Omega(u) is odd. Every supported uu is odd, so Ω(2u)=1+Ω(u)\Omega(2u)=1+\Omega(u) is even. On the retained squarefree predecessors this is also an even number of distinct prime factors. Finally u∈[x,2x]u \in[x,2x] wherever ax(u)>0a_x(u)>0; the resulting primes exceed xx for arbitrarily large xx, proving infinitude.

The order of choices is intrinsic to the argument: the original weight data and the micro-band choices determine CboxC_{\mathrm{box}} and CbalC_{\mathrm{bal}}; then come κ\kappa, b1b_1, the finite mesh, the distribution savings and their discrepancy exponent, and finally S1S_1. All thresholds for xx are imposed afterwards. In particular the absolute prime-proxy constant and the coefficient bound one, rather than any precision-dependent regularity, are what make this order valid.

References

  1. [1]R. C. Baker and G. Harman, Shifted primes without large prime factors, Acta Arith. 83 (1998), no. 4, 331–361. doi:10.4064/aa-83-4-331-361.DOI
  2. [2]J. Friedlander and H. Iwaniec, Asymptotic sieve for primes, Ann. of Math. (2) 148 (1998), no. 3, 1041–1065. doi:10.2307/121035; arXiv:math/9811186v1.DOI
  3. [3]J. D. Lichtman, Primes in arithmetic progressions to large moduli, and shifted primes without large prime factors, arXiv:2211.09641v1, 14 November 2022.arxiv.org/abs/2211.09641
  4. [4]OpenAI, Weighted dilation graphs, smooth shifted primes and totient fibers, OpenAI Math Release preprint OAI:Weighted-Dilation-Graphs-Smooth-Shifted-Primes-and-Totient-Fibers-September-24-2026, 2026.
  5. [5]T. D. Wooley, Vinogradov’s mean value theorem via efficient congruencing, Ann. of Math. (2) 175 (2012), 1575–1627. doi:10.4007/annals.2012.175.3.12.DOI

Paper details

Contents