MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522132274 · doi:10.1103/physreve.95.052108

Asymptotic prime partitions of integers

2017· article· en· W2522132274 on OpenAlexaff
J. Bartel, R. K. Bhaduri, M. Brack, M. V. N. Murthy

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum chaos and dynamical systems
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesFlorida State University
KeywordsCombinatoricsAsymptotic formulaOrder (exchange)Saddle pointMathematicsPartition function (quantum field theory)Laplace transformPrime number theoremInteger (computer science)Prime factorPartition (number theory)Function (biology)Prime numberPhysicsPrime (order theory)Quantum mechanicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we discuss P(n), the number of ways a given integer n may be written as a sum of primes. In particular, an asymptotic form P_{as}(n) valid for n→∞ is obtained analytically using standard techniques of quantum statistical mechanics. First, the bosonic partition function of primes, or the generating function of unrestricted prime partitions in number theory, is constructed. Next, the density of states is obtained using the saddle-point method for Laplace inversion of the partition function in the limit of large n. This gives directly the asymptotic number of prime partitions P_{as}(n). The leading term in the asymptotic expression grows exponentially as sqrt[n/ln(n)] and agrees with previous estimates. We calculate the next-to-leading-order term in the exponent, proportional to ln[ln(n)]/ln(n), and we show that an earlier result in the literature for its coefficient is incorrect. Furthermore, we also calculate the next higher-order correction, proportional to 1/ln(n) and given in Eq. (43), which so far has not been available in the literature. Finally, we compare our analytical results with the exact numerical values of P(n) up to n∼8×10^{6}. For the highest values, the remaining error between the exact P(n) and our P_{as}(n) is only about half of that obtained with the leading-order approximation. But we also show that, unlike for other types of partitions, the asymptotic limit for the prime partitions is still quite far from being reached even for n∼10^{7}.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. ESame topicQuantum chaos and dynamical systemsFrench-language works237,207