Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T09:00:59.378Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The factorial moments of additive functions with rational argument

Part of: Multiplicative number theory Probabilistic theory: distribution modulo $1$; metric theory of algorithms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 April 2009

J. Šiaulys  and
G. Stepanauskas
J. Šiaulys
Affiliation:
Department of Probability Theory and Number Theory Vilnius UniversityNaugarduko 24 03225 VilniusLithuania e-mail: [email protected]
G. Stepanauskas
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical Informatics Vilnius UniversityNaugarduko 24 03225 VilniusLithuania e-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We consider the weak convergence of the set of strongly additive functions f(q) with rational argument q. It is assumed that f(p) and f(1/p) ∈ {0, 1} for all primes. We obtain necessary and sufficient conditions of the convergence to the limit distribution. The proof is based on the method of factorial moments. Sieve results, and Halász's and Ruzsa's inequalities are used. We present a few examples of application of the given results to some sets of fractions.

Keywords

additive arithmetic functionfactorial momentlimit distributionFarey fraction.

MSC classification

Secondary: 11K65: Arithmetic functions 11N37: Asymptotic results on arithmetic functions 11N64: Other results on the distribution of values or the characterization of arithmetic functions
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society , Volume 81 , Issue 3 , December 2006 , pp. 425 - 440
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Mathematical Society 2006

References

[1]Elliott, P. D. T. A., Probabilistic number theory. I (Springer, Berlin, 1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Elliott, P. D. T. A., Probabilistic number theory. II (Springer, Berlin, 1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Halász, G., ‘On the distribution of additive arithmetical functions’, Acta Arith. 27 (1975), 143–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Kryžius, Z., ‘Topics on arithmetic functions with rational arguments’, in: Analytic and probabilistic methods in number theory (eds. Schweiger, F. and Manstavičius, E.), New trends in Probabability and Statistics 2 (VSP–TEV, Utrecht, Vilnius, 1992) pp. 235–249.Google Scholar
[5]Kubilius, J., Probabilistic methods in the theory of numbers, Translations of Mathematical Monographs 11 (Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Ruzsa, I. Z., ‘The law of large numbers for additive functions’, Studia Sci. Math. Hungar. 14 (1979), 247–253.Google Scholar
[7]Ruzsa, I. Z., ‘Generalized moments of additive functions’, J. Number Theory 18 (1984), 27–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Šiaulys, J., ‘Von Mises theorem in number theory’, in: Analytic and probabilistic methods in number theory (eds. Schweiger, F. and Manstavičius, E.), New trends in Probabability and Statistics 2 (VSP–TEV, Utrecht, Vilnius, 1992) pp. 293–310.Google Scholar
[9]Šiaulys, J., ‘Moments inequality for additive functions with rational argument’, Fiz. Mat. Fak. Moksl. Semin. Darb. 6 (2003), 131–141.Google Scholar
[10]Šiaulys, J., ‘The Halász's inequality for additive functions with rational argument’, Liet. Mat. Rink. 44 (2004), 272–277, (in Russian).Google Scholar
[11]Stakénas, V., ‘The additive functions and rational approximations’, Lithuanian Math. J. 28 (1988), 260–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Stakénas, V., ‘A sieve result for Farey fractions’, Lithuanian Math. J. 39 (1999), 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Stakénas, V. and Šiaulys, J., ‘Distribution of values of additive functions of a rational argument’, Lithuanian Math. J. 28 (1988), 273–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Tenenbaum, G., Introduction to analytic and probabilistic number theory, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 46 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995).Google Scholar