1 Introduction
Chebyshev [Reference Chebyshev4] investigated the least common multiple of consecutive positive integers when he made the first important attempt to prove the prime number theorem stating that $\log \mathrm {lcm}(1, 2, \ldots , n)\sim n$ as n goes to infinity (see, for example, [Reference Ireland and Rosen13]). Hanson [Reference Hanson8] and Nair [Reference Nair14] gave upper and lower bounds for $\mathrm {lcm}(1,2,\ldots ,n)$ and Nair’s lower bound was extended in [Reference Farhi6, Reference Hong, Luo, Qian and Wang11]. Goutziers [Reference Goutziers7] studied the asymptotic behaviour of the least common multiple of a set of integers not exceeding N. Bateman et al. [Reference Bateman, Kalb and Stenger1] obtained an asymptotic estimate for the least common multiple of arithmetic progressions that is generalised in [Reference Hong, Qian and Tan12] to products of linear polynomials. In another direction, Behrend [Reference Behrend2] strengthened an inequality of Heilbronn [Reference Heilbronn9] and Rohrbach [Reference Rohrbach15]. Erdős and Selfridge [Reference Erdős and Selfridge5] proved a remarkable old conjecture that predicts that the product of any two or more consecutive positive integers is never a perfect power.
Erdős observed another interesting phenomena related to least common multiples. Let n and k be positive integers with $n\ge k+1$ and let $\{a_i\}_{i=1}^n$ be a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers. Let
In 1978, Borwein [Reference Borwein3] confirmed a conjecture of Erdős by showing that $S_{n, 1}\le 1-{1}/{2^{n-1}}$ with equality if and only if $a_{i}=2^{i-1}$ for $1\le i \le n$ . Recently, Hong [Reference Hong10] improved this upper bound and used the new result to get sharp upper bounds for $S_{n, 2}$ and $S_{n, 3}$ . He also characterised the sequences $\{a_i\}_{i=1}^\infty $ for which these upper bounds are attained. In this paper, we concentrate on $S_{n,4}$ . We will present an optimal upper bound for $S_{n, 4}$ and characterise the sequences $\{a_i\}_{i=1}^n$ for which this upper bound is attained.
As usual, for any real number x, we denote by $\lfloor x\rfloor $ and $\lceil x\rceil $ respectively the largest integer no more than x and the smallest integer no less than x. For brevity, we write $S_n :=S_{n, 4}$ .
The main result of this paper can be stated as follows.
Theorem 1.1. Let n be an integer with $n\ge 5$ and let $\{a_i\}_{i=1}^n$ be a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers. Then:
-
(i) $S_{5}\le 1/5$ with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4, 5\}$ ;
-
(ii) $S_{6}\le {11}/{30}$ with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6\}$ ;
-
(iii) $S_{7}\le {43}/{90}$ with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6\}$ and $a_7=9$ ;
-
(vi) $S_{8}\le {101}/{180}$ with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6\}$ , $a_7=9$ and $a_8=12$ ;
-
(v) if $n\ge 9$ , then
(1.1) $$ \begin{align} S_{n}\le \frac{493}{420}-\frac{533}{105}\cdot\frac{1} {2^{\lfloor{n}/{4}\rfloor+1}} +\frac{\epsilon_{n}}{2^{\lfloor{n}/{4}\rfloor}}, \end{align} $$where$$ \begin{align*} \epsilon_n:= {\left\{\begin{array}{rl} 0 & \text{if} \ n\equiv 0\pmod 4,\\[5pt] \frac{2}{5} & \text{if} \ n\equiv 1\pmod 4,\\[5pt] \frac{11}{15} & \text{if} \ n\equiv 2\pmod 4,\\[5pt] \frac{107}{105} & \text{if} \ n\equiv 3\pmod 4, \end{array} \right.} \end{align*} $$and equality in (1.1) occurs if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4\}$ and $a_{4i+1}=5\times 2^{i-1} \ (1\le i\le \lfloor {(n-1)}/{4}\rfloor ), a_{4i+2}= 3\times 2^{i} \ (1\le i\le \lfloor {(n-2)}/{4}\rfloor )$ , $a_{4i+3}=7\times 2^{i-1} \ (1\le i\le \lfloor {(n-3)}/{4}\rfloor )$ and $a_{4i+4}=2^{i+2} \ (1\le i\le \lfloor {n}/{4}\rfloor -1)$ .
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. In Section 2, we prove several preliminary lemmas. In Section 3, we provide a proof for our main result.
2 Auxiliary lemmas
In this section, we supply several auxiliary lemmas that are needed in the proof of Theorem 1.1. The first is Hong’s upper bound [Reference Hong10, Theorem 1.2] which improves Borwein’s upper bound [Reference Borwein3].
Lemma 2.1 [Reference Hong10, Theorem 1.2]
Let n be an integer with $n\ge 2$ and let $\{a_i\}_{i=1}^n$ be a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers. Then
with equality in (2.1) if and only if $a_{i}=2^{i-1}a_{1}$ for all integers i with $1 \le i \le n$ .
Lemma 2.2. Let m be an integer with $m\ge 3$ . Then
and
Proof. Since $m\ge 3$ , a direct computation gives the desired inequalities.
Lemma 2.3. Let $S_n$ be given as above. Then:
-
(i) $S_5\le 1/5$ with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4, 5\}$ ;
-
(ii) $S_6\le {11}/{30}$ with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6\}$ ;
-
(iii) $S_7\le {43}/{90}$ with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6\}$ and $a_7=9$ .
Proof. We first deal with $S_5$ . Since $\mathrm {lcm}(a_1, a_{4})\ge a_{5}\ge 5$ ,
The equality in (2.2) holds if and only if $\mathrm {lcm}(a_1, a_{5})=5$ , which is true if and only if $a_1=1$ and $a_5=5$ . However, $a_1<a_2<a_3<a_4<a_5$ . So the equality in (2.2) holds if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5\}$ .
Now consider $S_6$ . Since $a_2\ge 2, a_2\mid \mathrm {lcm}(a_2, a_{6})$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_2, a_{6})\ge a_6\ge 6$ , we deduce that $\mathrm {lcm}(a_2, a_{6})\ge 6$ with equality if and only if $a_2=2$ and $a_6=6$ . So
with equality in (2.3) if and only if $\mathrm {lcm}(a_1, a_{5})=5$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_2, a_{6})=6$ , which is true if and only if $a_1=1, a_2=2, a_5=5$ and $a_6=6$ , which is true if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1,2,3,4, 5, 6\}$ .
Finally, we consider $S_7$ . Since $a_3\ge 3, a_3\mid \mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})\ge a_7\ge 7$ , we deduce that either $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})=8$ which is true if and only if $a_3=4$ and $a_7=8$ , or $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})=9$ which is true if and only if $a_3=3$ and $a_7=9$ , or $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})\ge 10$ . We divide the rest of the proof into three cases.
If $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})\ge 10$ , then
as desired.
If $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})=8$ , then $a_3=4$ and $a_7=8$ . This implies that $a_4=5, a_5=6$ and $a_6=7$ . Since $(a_1, a_2)\in \{(1,2), (1,3), (2,3)\}$ , we have $\mathrm {lcm}(a_1, a_{5})=6$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_2, a_{6})\in \{14, 21\}$ . It then follows that
If $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})=9$ , then we must have $a_3=3$ and $a_7=9$ . So $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})=9$ . It then follows that
with equality in (2.4) if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_{7})=9$ , if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ and $a_7=9$ as required.
This completes the proof of Lemma 2.3.
Lemma 2.4. Let m be a positive integer with $m\ge 2$ and $\mathcal {A}=\{a_i\}_{i=1}^8$ a strictly increasing sequence of eight positive integers. Let
Then both of the following statements are true.
-
(i) Either $\Box _2= {101}/{180}$ which is true if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ , $a_7=9$ and $a_8=12$ , or $\Box _2= {389}/{720}$ which holds if and only if $a_i=i$ for all integers $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ , $a_7=9$ and $a_8=16$ , or $\Box _2= {453}/{840}$ which is true if and only if $a_i=i$ for all integers $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8\}$ , or $\Box _2 < {453}/{840}$ .
-
(ii) If $m\ge 3$ , then
(2.6) $$ \begin{align} \Box_m\le\frac{493}{420}-\frac{533}{105}\cdot\frac{1}{2^{m+1}}, \end{align} $$with equality in (2.6) if and only if $a_i=i$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 8$ .
Proof (i). Evidently, $\Box _2=\sum _{i=1}^4 {1}/{\mathrm {lcm}(a_i, a_{i+4})}.$ We consider the following cases.
Case 1: $a_5\ge 6$ . Then $a_8\ge 9$ . If $a_8\ge 10$ , then by the fact $\mathrm {lcm}(a_i, a_{i+4})\ge a_{i+4}$ for all $i\in \{1,2,3,4\}$ , we derive
If $a_8=9$ , then $a_5=6$ , $a_6=7$ and $a_7=8$ . This implies that $a_1\in \{1,2\}$ , $a_2\in \{2, 3\}, a_3\in \{3, 4\}$ and $a_4\in \{4,5\}$ . It follows that $\mathrm {lcm}(a_1, a_5)=6$ , $\mathrm {lcm}(a_2, a_6)\in \{14, 21\}, \mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_7)=\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, 8)\in \{8, 24\}$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)=\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, 9)\in \{36, 45\}$ . So
Case 2: $a_5=5$ . Then $a_i=i$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 4$ . If $a_6\ge 7$ , then $a_7\ge 8$ and $a_8\ge 9$ . So $\mathrm {lcm}(a_1, a_5)=5, \mathrm {lcm}(a_2, a_6)\ge 8, \mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_7)\ge 9$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)\ge 12$ . However, $1/9+ {1}/{12} < 1/6 + {1}/{21}$ . Thus
In what follows, we let $a_6=6$ . If $a_7\ge 10$ , then $a_8\ge 11$ . It follows that $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_7)\ge 12$ with equality holding if and only if $a_7=12$ , and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)\ge 12$ with equality occurring if and only if $a_8=12$ . Since $a_7<a_8$ ,
It remains to consider the case $a_7\in \{7, 8, 9\}$ . We consider three subcases.
Subcase 2.1: $a_7=7$ . Then $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_7)=21$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)=\mathrm {lcm}(4, a_8)\ge 8$ with equality if and only if $a_8=8$ . So
with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 8$ .
Subcase 2.2: $a_7=8$ . Then $a_8\ge 9$ . Hence
Subcase 2.3: $a_7=9$ . Then $a_8\ge 10$ . It follows that either $\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)=12$ which is true if and only if $a_8=12$ , or $\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)=16$ which is true if and only if $a_8=16$ , or $\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)\ge 20$ . We then deduce that either
which is true if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ , $a_7=9$ and $a_8=12$ , or
which holds if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ , $a_7=9$ and $a_8=16$ , or
as expected. This completes the proof of part (i).
(ii). Let $m\ge 3$ . Since $\mathrm {lcm}(a_i, a_{i+4})\ge a_{i+4}$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 4$ ,
with equality in (2.7) if and only if $a_i\mid a_{i+4}$ for all integers $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4\}$ . Let $S_0:= {493}/{420} - {533}/{105} \cdot {1}/({2^{m+1}})$ . We divide the rest of the proof into two cases.
Case 1: $a_5\ge 6$ . Then $a_6\ge 7, a_7\ge 8$ and $a_8\ge 9$ . So by (2.7) and Lemma 2.2,
since $m\ge 3$ . This gives the desired result for Case 1.
Case 2: $a_5=5$ . Then $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4\}$ . We consider three subcases.
Subcase 2.1: $a_6=6$ . Then $a_7\ge 7$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_7)=\mathrm {lcm}(3, a_7)\ge 9$ . So
If $a_7=7$ , then it follows from $a_8\ge 8$ that $\mathrm {lcm}(4, a_8)\ge 8$ with equality if and only if $a_8=8$ . Therefore,
with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 8$ .
If $a_7=8$ , then $a_8\ge 9$ and so $\mathrm {lcm}(4, a_8)\ge 12$ . Thus by (2.8),
If $a_7=9$ , then $\mathrm {lcm}(3, a_7)=9$ , $a_8\ge 10$ and so $\mathrm {lcm}(4, a_8)\ge 12$ . Since $m\ge 3$ and by Lemma 2.2,
If $a_7\ge 10$ , then $a_8\ge 11$ . Hence $\mathrm {lcm}(3, a_7)\ge 12$ with equality holding if and only if $a_7=12$ , and $\mathrm {lcm}(4, a_8)\ge 12$ with equality occurring if and only if $a_8=12$ . Since $a_7<a_8$ and $m\ge 3$ ,
Subcase 2.2: $a_6=7$ . Then $a_7\ge 8$ and $a_8\ge 9$ . So $\mathrm {lcm}(3, a_7)\ge 9$ with equality if and only if $a_7=9$ , and $\mathrm {lcm}(4, a_8)\ge 12$ with equality if and only if $a_8=12$ . Since ${1}/{14} + 1/9 + {1}/{12} < 1/6 + 1/8 + {1}/{21}$ , it then follows immediately that
Subcase 2.3: $a_6\ge 8$ . Then $a_7\ge 9$ and $a_8\ge 10$ . Thus $\mathrm {lcm}(a_2, a_6)=\mathrm {lcm}(2, a_6)\ge 8$ , $\mathrm {lcm}(a_3, a_7) =\mathrm {lcm}(3, a_7)\ge 9$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)=\mathrm {lcm}(4, a_8)\ge a_8\ge 10$ which implies that $\mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)\ge 12$ since $4\mid \mathrm {lcm}(a_4, a_8)$ . It then follows from the inequality $ 1/9 + {1}/{12} < 1/6 + {1}/{21}$ that
This completes the proof of part (ii).
3 Proof of Theorem 1.1
Let $m\ge 2$ be an integer and let $\Box _m$ be defined as in (2.5). Then $\Box _2=S_8$ , so the results for parts (i) to (iv) follow from Lemmas 2.3 and 2.4. It remains to prove (v).
We first deal with the upper bounds for $S_9, S_{10}$ and $S_{11}$ . For $r\in \{1,2,3\}$ ,
By Lemma 2.4, either $\Box _2= {101}/{180}$ which is true if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ , $a_7=9$ and $a_8=12$ , or $\Box _2= {389}/{720}$ which holds if and only if $a_i=i$ for all integers $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ , $a_7=9$ and $a_8=16$ , or $\Box _2= {453}/{840}$ which is true if and only if $a_i=i$ for all integers $i\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8\}$ , or $\Box _2 < {453}/{840}$ .
If $\Box _2 < {453}/{840}$ , then it follows from $\mathrm {lcm}(a_5, a_9)\ge 10, \mathrm {lcm}(a_6, a_{10})\ge 12$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_7, a_{11})\ge 14$ that
If $\Box _2= {101}/{180}$ , then by Lemma 2.4, we must have $a_i=i$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 6$ , $a_7=9$ and $a_8=12$ . So $a_9\ge 13$ , $a_{10}\ge 14$ and $a_{11}\ge 15$ . This implies that $\mathrm {lcm}(a_5, a_9)=\mathrm {lcm}(5, a_9)\ge 15$ with equality if and only if $a_9=15$ , $\mathrm {lcm}(a_6, a_{10})=\mathrm {lcm}(6, a_{10})\ge 18$ with equality if and only if $a_{10}=18$ , and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_7, a_{11})=\mathrm {lcm}(9, a_{11})\ge 18$ with equality if and only if $a_{11}=18$ . Hence
as desired.
If $\Box _2= {389}/{720}$ , then by Lemma 2.4, we must have $a_i=i$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 6$ , $a_7=9$ and $a_8=16$ . So $a_9\ge 17$ , $a_{10}\ge 18$ and $a_{11}\ge 19$ which implies that $\mathrm {lcm}(a_5, a_9)=\mathrm {lcm}(5, a_9)\ge 20$ with equality if and only if $a_9=20$ , $\mathrm {lcm}(a_6, a_{10})=\mathrm {lcm}(6, a_{10})\ge 18$ with equality if and only if $a_{10}=18$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_7, a_{11})=\mathrm {lcm}(9, a_{11})\ge 27$ with equality if and only if $a_{11}=27$ . One then deduces that
as desired.
If $\Box _2 = {453}/{840}$ , then by Lemma 2.4, we must have $a_i=i$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 8$ . So $a_9\ge 9$ which implies that $\mathrm {lcm}(a_5, a_9)\ge 10$ with equality if and only if $a_9=10$ . Furthermore, $\mathrm {lcm}(a_6, a_{10})\ge 12$ with equality if and only if $a_{10}=12$ and $\mathrm {lcm}(a_7, a_{11})\ge 14$ with equality if and only if $a_{11}=14$ . Thus
where each equality in (3.1) to (3.3) holds if and only if $a_i=i$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 8$ , $a_9=10$ , $a_{10}=12$ and $a_{11}=14$ . So part (v) is true when $9\le n\le 11$ .
In what follows, we always assume that $n\ge 12$ . Then we can write $n=4m$ or $n=4m+r$ for some integers m and r with $m\ge 3$ and $1\le r\le 3$ . For any integer i with $1\le i\le 4$ , we define
Then
and
For any integer i with $1\le i\le 4$ , applying Lemma 2.1 to the subsequence $\{a_{i+4}, a_{i+8},\ldots , a_{i+4(m-1)}\}$ yields
with equality in (3.6) if and only if $a_{i+4j}=a_{i+4}\times 2^{j-1}$ for all integers j with $1\le j\le m-1$ . Further, for any integer i with $1\le i\le r$ , applying Lemma 2.1 to the subsequence $\{a_{4+i}, a_{8+i},\ldots , a_{4m+i}\}$ gives
with equality in (3.7) if and only if $a_{4j+i}=a_{4+i}\times 2^{j-1}$ for all integers j with $1\le j\le m$ . Then by (3.4) and (3.6),
with equality in (3.8) if and only if $a_{4j+i}=a_{4+i}\times 2^{j-1}$ for all integers i and j with $1\le j\le m-1$ and $1\le i\le 4$ . By (3.5), (3.6) and (3.7),
and equality in (3.9) holds if and only if $a_{4j+i}=a_{4+i}\times 2^{j-1}$ for all integers i and j with $1\le j\le m-1$ and $1\le i\le 4$ and $a_{4m+i}=a_{4+i}\times 2^{m-1}$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le r$ . Now by Lemma 2.4, if $m\ge 3$ , then
with equality in (3.10) if and only if $a_i=i$ for all integers i with $1\le i\le 8$ . Notice that
with equality in (3.11) if and only if $a_{4+i}=4+i$ for all $1\le i\le r$ . Therefore, by (3.8) and (3.10), $S_{4m}\le S_0$ with equality if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4\}$ and $a_{4j+i}=(4+i)\times 2^{j-1}$ for all integers i and j with $1\le j\le m-1$ and $1\le i\le 4$ . It follows from (3.9) and (3.11) that
with equality in (3.12) if and only if $a_i=i$ for all $i\in \{1, 2, 3, 4\}$ , $a_{4j+i}=(4+i)\times 2^{j-1}$ for all integers i and j with $1\le j\le m-1$ and $1\le i\le 4$ and $a_{4m+i}=(4+i)\times 2^{m-1}$ for $1\le i\le r$ . So part (v) is proved when $n\ge 12$ .
This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Acknowledgement
This work was carried out during a visit by the first author to Brock University as a postdoctoral fellow. He would like to sincerely thank the host institution for its hospitality and for providing an excellent atmosphere for research.