## A note on Primes in Short Intervals

### November 27, 2006

Abstract
Instead of a strong quantitative form of the Hardy-Littlewood prime $k$  -tuple conjecture, one can assume an average form of it and still obtains the same distribution result on $\psi \left(x+h\right)-\psi \left(x\right)$  by Montgomery and Soundararajan [ 1 ].

1 Introduction

Let $\Lambda \left(n\right)$  be von Mangoldt lambda function, $\mu \left(n\right)$  be the Möbius function and $\phi \left(n\right)$  be the Euler's phi function. Let $e\left(\theta \right)={e}^{2\pi i\theta }$  , $\epsilon >0$  and $\psi \left(x\right)={\sum }_{n\le x}\Lambda \left(n\right)$  .
In [ 1 ], Montgomery and Soundararajan studied the distribution of primes in short intervals
 $\begin{array}{c}{M}_{K}\left(N;H\right):={\sum }_{n=1}^{N}\left(\psi \left(n+H\right)-\psi \left(n\right)-H{\right)}^{K}\end{array}$ (1)
under a strong quantitative form of the Hardy-Littlewood prime $k$  -tuple conjecture:
Conjecture 1.
 $\begin{array}{c}{{\sum }_{n\le x}}^{k}{\prod }_{i=1}\Lambda \left(n+{d}_{i}\right)=\mathfrak{S}\left(\mathcal{D}\right)x+{E}_{k}\left(x;\mathcal{D}\right)\end{array}$ (2)
holds with ${E}_{k}\left(x;\mathcal{D}\right){\ll }_{\epsilon ,K}{N}^{1/2+\epsilon }$  uniformly for $1\le k\le K$  , $0\le x\le N$  , and distinct ${d}_{i}$  satisfying $1\le {d}_{i}\le H$  . Here $\mathcal{D}=\left\{{d}_{1},{d}_{2},...,{d}_{k}\right\}$  , and $\mathfrak{S}\left(\mathcal{D}\right)={{\sum }_{{q}_{1},...,{q}_{k}}}_{1\le {q}_{i}<\infty }\left({}^{k}{\prod }_{i=1}\frac{\mu \left({q}_{i}\right)}{\phi \left({q}_{i}\right)}\right){{{{\sum }_{{a}_{1},...,{a}_{k}}}_{1\le {a}_{i}\le {q}_{i}}}_{\left({a}_{i},{q}_{i}\right)=1}}_{\sum {a}_{i}/{q}_{i}\in \mathbb{Z}}e\left({\sum }_{i=1}^{k}\frac{{a}_{i}{d}_{i}}{{q}_{i}}\right)$  is the singular series as in equation (2) of [ 1 ].
They proved
Theorem 1. Under Conjecture  1 ,
 $\begin{array}{cccc}{M}_{K}\left(N;H\right)=& {\mu }_{k}{H}^{K/2}{\int }_{1}^{N}\left(logx/H+B{\right)}^{K/2}dx& & +O\left(N\left(logN{\right)}^{K/2}{H}^{K/2}{\left(\frac{H}{logN}\right)}^{-1/\left(8K\right)}+{H}^{K}{N}^{1/2+\epsilon }\right)\end{array}$
uniformly for $logN\le H\le {N}^{1/K}$  , where ${\mu }_{k}=1\cdot 3\cdot \cdot \cdot \left(k-1\right)$  if $k$  is even, and ${\mu }_{k}=0$  if $k$  is odd; $B=1-{C}_{0}-log2\pi$  and ${C}_{0}$  denotes Euler's constant.
The first author of [ 1 ] suggested to the present author that Theorem  1 is probably true under an average form of the Hardy-Littlewood prime $k$  -tuple conjecture, namely:
Conjecture 2. For $x\ge H$  , ${{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}{E}_{k}\left(x,\mathcal{D}{\right)}^{2}{\ll }_{k}{x}^{1+\epsilon }{H}^{k}.$
Our goal in this paper is to prove Theorem  1 under Conjecture  2 .
Acknowledgement The author would like to thank Prof. Hugh Montgomery for suggesting the problem and the American Institute of Mathematics for provision both financially and spatially.

2 Proof of Theorem  1

Lemma 1. With ${\Lambda }_{0}\left(n\right)=\Lambda \left(n\right)-1$  and $|A|$  denoting the size of a set $A$  , ${{\sum }_{n\le x}}^{k}{\prod }_{i=1}{\Lambda }_{0}\left(n+{d}_{i}\right)={\mathfrak{S}}_{0}\left(\mathcal{D}\right)x+O\left({\sum }_{\mathcal{J}\subset \left\{1,2,...,k\right\}}|{E}_{|\mathcal{J}|}\left(x;{\mathcal{D}}_{\mathcal{J}}\right)|\right)$  where ${\mathfrak{S}}_{0}\left(\mathcal{D}\right)={{\sum }_{{q}_{1},...,{q}_{k}}}_{1<{q}_{i}<\infty }\left({}^{k}{\prod }_{i=1}\frac{\mu \left({q}_{i}\right)}{\phi \left({q}_{i}\right)}\right){{{{\sum }_{{a}_{1},...,{a}_{k}}}_{1\le {a}_{i}\le {q}_{i}}}_{\left({a}_{i},{q}_{i}\right)=1}}_{\sum {a}_{i}/{q}_{i}\in \mathbb{Z}}e\left({\sum }_{i=1}^{k}\frac{{a}_{i}{d}_{i}}{{q}_{i}}\right)$  and ${\mathcal{D}}_{\mathcal{J}}=\left\{{d}_{j}{\right\}}_{j\in \mathcal{J}}$  .
Proof: The left hand side
 $\begin{array}{cccccccc}=& {{\sum }_{n\le x}}^{k}{\prod }_{i=1}\left(\Lambda \left(n+{d}_{i}\right)-1\right)={\sum }_{n\le x}{\sum }_{\mathcal{J}\subset \left\{1,2,...,k\right\}}\left(-1{\right)}^{k-|\mathcal{J}|}{\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{J}}\Lambda \left(n+{d}_{i}\right)& =& {\sum }_{\mathcal{J}\subset \left\{1,2,...,k\right\}}\left(-1{\right)}^{k-|\mathcal{J}|}{\sum }_{n\le x}{\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{J}}\Lambda \left(n+{d}_{i}\right)& =& {\sum }_{\mathcal{J}\subset \left\{1,2,...,k\right\}}\left(-1{\right)}^{k-|\mathcal{J}|}\left(\mathfrak{S}\left({\mathcal{D}}_{\mathcal{J}}\right)x+{E}_{|\mathcal{J}|}\left(x;{\mathcal{D}}_{\mathcal{J}}\right)\right)& =& {\mathfrak{S}}_{0}\left(\mathcal{D}\right)x+O\left({\sum }_{\mathcal{J}\subset \left\{1,2,...,k\right\}}|{E}_{|\mathcal{J}|}\left(x;{\mathcal{D}}_{\mathcal{J}}\right)|\right)\end{array}$
by ( 2 ) and the identity ${\mathfrak{S}}_{0}\left(\mathcal{D}\right)={\sum }_{\mathcal{ℐ}\subset \mathcal{D}}\left(-1{\right)}^{|\mathcal{ℐ}|}\mathfrak{S}\left(\mathcal{ℐ}\right)$  (see equation (5) of [ 1 ]).
Proof of Theorem  1 under Conjecture  2 : Following [ 1 ], we expand ( 1 ) and have
 $\begin{array}{c}\begin{array}{cccc}{M}_{K}\left(N;H\right)=& {\sum }_{k=1}^{K}\frac{1}{k!}{{\sum }_{1\le {M}_{1},...,{M}_{k}}}_{\sum {M}_{i}=K}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0}{}{K}{{M}_{1}\cdot \cdot \cdot {M}_{k}}\right)& & ×{{{\sum }_{{m}_{1},...,{m}_{k}}}_{0\le {m}_{i}<{M}_{i}}}^{k}{\prod }_{i=1}\left(-1{\right)}^{{M}_{i}-1-{m}_{i}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0}{}{{M}_{i}-1}{{m}_{i}}\right){L}_{k}\left(\mathbf{m}\right),\end{array}\end{array}$ (3)
where
 $\begin{array}{c}{L}_{k}\left(\mathbf{m}\right):={{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}{{\sum }_{n=1}^{N}}^{k}{\prod }_{i=1}{\Lambda }_{{m}_{i}}\left(n+{d}_{i}\right)\end{array}$ (4)
and ${\Lambda }_{m}\left(n\right):=\Lambda \left(n{\right)}^{m}{\Lambda }_{0}\left(n\right)$  . To estimate ${L}_{k}\left(\mathbf{m}\right)$  , one needs to distinguish between those $i$  for which ${m}_{i}=0$  and those for which ${m}_{i}>0$  . Following [ 1 ], we set $\mathcal{K}=\left\{1,...,k\right\}$  and introduce $\mathcal{ℋ}=\left\{i\in \mathcal{K}:{m}_{i}\ge 1\right\},\mathcal{ℐ}=\left\{i\in \mathcal{K}:{m}_{i}=0\right\},\mathcal{J}\subset \mathcal{K}.$  Then
 $\begin{array}{cccccccc}& {\sum }_{n\le x}{\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{ℐ}}{\Lambda }_{0}\left(n+{d}_{i}\right){\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{ℋ}}\Lambda \left(n+{d}_{i}\right)& =& {\sum }_{n\le x}{{\sum }_{\mathcal{J}}}_{\mathcal{ℐ}\subset \mathcal{J}\subset \mathcal{K}}{\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{J}}{\Lambda }_{0}\left(n+{d}_{i}\right)={{\sum }_{\mathcal{J}}}_{\mathcal{ℐ}\subset \mathcal{J}\subset \mathcal{K}}{\sum }_{n\le x}{\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{J}}{\Lambda }_{0}\left(n+{d}_{i}\right)& =& {{\sum }_{\mathcal{J}}}_{\mathcal{ℐ}\subset \mathcal{J}\subset \mathcal{K}}\left[{\mathfrak{S}}_{0}\left({\mathcal{D}}_{\mathcal{J}}\right)x+O\left({\sum }_{{\mathcal{J}}^{\prime }\subset \mathcal{J}}|{E}_{|{\mathcal{J}}^{\prime }|}\left(x;{\mathcal{D}}_{{\mathcal{J}}^{\prime }}\right)|\right)\right]& =& x{{\sum }_{\mathcal{J}}}_{\mathcal{ℐ}\subset \mathcal{J}\subset \mathcal{K}}{\mathfrak{S}}_{0}\left({\mathcal{D}}_{\mathcal{J}}\right)+{O}_{k}\left({\sum }_{{\mathcal{K}}^{\prime }\subset \mathcal{K}}|{E}_{|{\mathcal{K}}^{\prime }|}\left(x;{\mathcal{D}}_{{\mathcal{K}}^{\prime }}\right)|\right)\end{array}$
by Lemma  1 . We write the above as $f\left(x\right)=cx+{E}_{x,\mathcal{K}}$  . In general,
 $\begin{array}{cccccccc}& {\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{X}g\left(x\right)df\left(x\right)& =& g\left(X\right)f\left(X\right)-{\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{X}f\left(x\right){g}^{\prime }\left(x\right)dx& =& g\left(X\right)\left[cX+{E}_{X,\mathcal{K}}\right]-{\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{X}\left(cx+{E}_{x,\mathcal{K}}\right){g}^{\prime }\left(x\right)dx& =& c{\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{X}g\left(x\right)dx+O\left({E}_{X,\mathcal{K}}|g\left(X\right)|+{\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{X}{E}_{x,\mathcal{K}}|{g}^{\prime }\left(x\right)|dx\right).\end{array}$
Thus, by integration by parts,
 $\begin{array}{cccccccc}{\sum }_{n=1}^{N}& \left({\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{ℐ}}{\Lambda }_{0}\left(n+{d}_{i}\right)\right)\left({\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{ℋ}}\Lambda \left(n+{d}_{i}\right)\left(log\left(n+{d}_{i}\right){\right)}^{{m}_{i}-1}\left(log\left(n+{d}_{i}\right)-1\right)\right)& =& {\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{N}{\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{ℋ}}\left(log\left(x+{d}_{i}\right){\right)}^{{m}_{i}-1}\left(log\left(x+{d}_{i}\right)-1\right)df\left(x\right)& =& c{\int }_{1}^{N}{\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{ℋ}}\left(log\left(x+{d}_{i}\right){\right)}^{{m}_{i}-1}\left(log\left(x+{d}_{i}\right)-1\right)dx+O\left({E}_{N,\mathcal{K}}{log}^{K}N& & +{\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{N}{E}_{x,\mathcal{K}}\frac{{log}^{K}\left(x+H\right)}{x}dx\right).\end{array}$
This is the analogue of equation (65) in [ 1 ]. Now, note that ${\Lambda }_{m}\left(n\right)=\Lambda \left(n\right)\left(logn{\right)}^{m-1}\left(logn-1\right)$  when $n$  is prime. We have, by following the argument in [ 1 ],
 $\begin{array}{c}\begin{array}{cccccc}& {{\sum }_{n=1}^{N}}^{k}{\prod }_{i=1}{\Lambda }_{{m}_{i}}\left(n+{d}_{i}\right)& =& \left({{\sum }_{\mathcal{J}}}_{\mathcal{ℐ}\subset \mathcal{J}\subset \mathcal{K}}{\mathfrak{S}}_{0}\left({\mathcal{D}}_{\mathcal{J}}\right)\right)\left({I}_{\mathbf{m}}\left(N\right)+O\left(H\left(logN{\right)}^{K-k}\right)\right)+O\left({N}^{1/2+\epsilon }\right)& & +O\left({E}_{N,\mathcal{K}}{log}^{K}N+{\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{N}{E}_{x,\mathcal{K}}\frac{{log}^{K}\left(x+H\right)}{x}dx\right).\end{array}\end{array}$ (5)
where ${I}_{\mathbf{m}}\left(N\right):={\int }_{1}^{N}{\prod }_{i\in \mathcal{ℋ}}\left(\left(logx{\right)}^{{m}_{i}-1}\left(logx-1\right)\right)dx.$  Putting ( 5 ) into ( 4 ),
 $\begin{array}{c}\begin{array}{cccc}{L}_{k}\left(\mathbf{m}\right)=& {I}_{\mathbf{m}}\left(N\right){{\sum }_{\mathcal{J}}}_{\mathcal{ℐ}\subset \mathcal{J}\subset \mathcal{K}}{{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}{\mathfrak{S}}_{0}\left({\mathcal{D}}_{\mathcal{J}}\right)+O\left({H}^{k}{N}^{1/2+\epsilon }\right)& & +O\left({{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}{E}_{N,\mathcal{K}}{log}^{K}N+{\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{N}{{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}{E}_{x,\mathcal{K}}\frac{{log}^{K}x}{x}dx\right).\end{array}\end{array}$ (6)
Now, we use Conjecture  2 . By Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, ${{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}|{E}_{k}\left(x,\mathcal{D}\right)|{\ll }_{k}{x}^{1/2+\epsilon }{H}^{k}.$  In particular,
 $\begin{array}{cccc}{{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}{E}_{x,\mathcal{K}}=& {{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}{\sum }_{{\mathcal{K}}^{\prime }\subset \mathcal{K}}|{E}_{|{\mathcal{K}}^{\prime }|}\left(x;{\mathcal{D}}_{{\mathcal{K}}^{\prime }}\right)|& & {\ll }_{k}{\sum }_{j=0}^{k}{{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{j}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}|{E}_{j}\left(x;\mathcal{D}\right)|{\ll }_{k}{x}^{1/2+\epsilon }{H}^{k}\end{array}$
Applying this to ( 6 ), the second error term is $\ll {N}^{1/2+\epsilon }{H}^{k}$  while the third error term is
 $\begin{array}{cccc}=& {\int }_{H}^{N}{{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}{E}_{x,\mathcal{K}}\frac{{log}^{K}\left(x+H\right)}{x}dx+{\int }_{{1}^{-}}^{H}{{{\sum }_{{d}_{1},...,{d}_{k}}}_{1\le {d}_{i}\le H}}_{{d}_{i}\text{distinct}}{E}_{x,\mathcal{K}}\frac{{log}^{K}\left(x+H\right)}{x}dx& {\ll }_{k}& {N}^{1/2+\epsilon }{H}^{k}+{\int }_{1}^{H}{H}^{k+1}\frac{{log}^{K}\left(x+H\right)}{x}dx{\ll }_{K}{N}^{1/2+\epsilon }{H}^{k}\end{array}$
as $H\le {N}^{1/2}$  . Hence, ( 6 ) has an error $O\left({H}^{k}{N}^{1/2+\epsilon }\right)$  and the rest of the proof in [ 1 ] follows. Therefore, we have Theorem  1 under Conjecture  2 .
References

1. H.L. Montgomery and K. Soundararajan, Primes in Short Intervals, Commun. Math. Phys. 252 (2004), 589-617.

Tsz Ho Chan American Institute of Mathematics 360 Portage Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94306 U.S.A. thchan@aimath.org