[Corrigendum] Note on the Riemann Hypothesis: International Conference on Recent Developments in Mathematics (ICRDM 2022)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robin's criterion states that the Riemann hypothesis is true if and only if the inequality $\sigma(n) < e^{\gamma} \cdot n \cdot \log \log n$ holds for all natural numbers $n > 5040$, where $\sigma(n)$ is the sum-of-divisors function of $n$ and $\gamma \approx 0.57721$ is the Euler-Mascheroni constant. We require the properties of superabundant numbers, that is to say left to right maxima of $n \mapsto \frac{\sigma(n)}{n}$. In this note, using Robin's inequality on superabundant numbers, we prove that the Riemann hypothesis is true. This is a "Corrigendum" for a paper presentation at the ICRDM 2022 held at Canadian University Dubai, Dubai, UAE during 24-26 August 2022. Besides, this proof is an extension of the article "Robin's criterion on divisibility" published by The Ramanujan Journal on May 3rd, 2022.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".