Congruence conjectures for DSOME modulo 8 and 16
Let denote the sum of all odd parts in the partitions of into distinct parts minus the sum of all even parts. DSOME congruence conjecture. For all integers ,
and
The conjecture is based on numerical calculations and proposes further congruences for the distinct-part function ; the supplied source gives no resolution.
References
Primary source
Nayandeep Deka Baruah and Pankaj Gogoi, “Arithmetic properties of DSOME function”, arXiv:2602.20025 (2026).
Progress summary
A 2026 paper claims the modulo-eight part is proved, while a later unverified posted argument claims the remaining modulo-sixteen part is also complete.
Baruah and Gogoi proposed the two congruence families in 2026 from numerical evidence. Their paper supplied generating-function methods and recorded the assertions as conjectures.
Known results
- Baruah and Gogoi (2026) derived a closed generating function and new congruences for , including the conjectured modulo- and modulo- families.
August 2026 claimed proofs
Bardhan and Saikia claim a stronger theorem, for , which proves the problem’s modulo- family. A reader-written complete proof of the modulo- family is also presented, but it has not been independently verified.
Posted attempt
The posted argument claims a complete proof of , using a coefficientwise theta-series calculation and an involution; the attempt has not been independently verified.
Current status (as of August 2026): The modulo- assertion has a claimed arXiv proof, while the modulo- assertion has only an unverified complete-proof claim.
Solutions 1
ProofThis solution needs a summarySee full solution
The two congruences for
For a nonnegative integer , let be the sum of the odd parts minus the sum of the even parts, taken over all partitions of into distinct parts. We prove Baruah and Gogoi's Conjecture 4.1: for every ,
The first congruence was proved by Bardhan and Saikia in Theorem 4.11 and Remark 4.12. We prove the second. We will also use their quadratic-representation involution, explicitly given below. The additional step is a coefficientwise theta-series calculation modulo ; two parity decompositions then finish the argument.
1. A weighted pentagonal identity
All series in the proof are formal power series with integer coefficients. Put
Thus . Write . The generating-function identity in Baruah and Gogoi, Theorem 1.1, together with , gives
Set for . We use the classical identities recorded as (2.2) and (4.54) in Bardhan and Saikia:
Define and . Since , (2) implies
A direct calculation, valid for every integer , gives
Consequently . Substituting this into modulo gives . Therefore
In particular, both and have zero coefficient at every index not of the form .
2. The coefficient calculation modulo
Fix an integer such that and for every . For a series , write , and put
We claim that
Here are the details. Factoring the numerator of (1) gives the exact identity
Since has zero constant term, expansion of the inverse is valid formally. With
we obtain . Our assumption on gives , so
For any series ,
Using (4), then , yields
The following congruences follow coefficientwise by separating odd and even in the definition of :
For the last line, square the preceding parity expression and use .
Differentiating gives
Substitution into (7), followed by (8), gives
Indeed, before using , the coefficient of in this simplification is , which vanishes modulo .
To simplify (9), use , which follows from , and . Also (4) and give
It follows that
Together with (6), this proves (5).
3. The progression
Now let with , and put
Thus the exponent of in is exactly one. In particular is not a square, so is not pentagonal, since . Also , and (5) applies.
By (2), the sums have the explicit form
For , a summand would give . Reduction modulo forces both and to be divisible by , because is a quadratic nonresidue modulo . This contradicts the exponent of in . The same argument for uses the nonresidue . Hence
Consider the finite set
We use the involution from the proof of Bardhan and Saikia's Theorem 4.11. For , put . Then . Neither nor is divisible by , and there is a unique such that . Define
Both and are integers, , and : equality would make . Moreover,
so . To check the inverse explicitly, let be the sign of and put . Then
Thus is the unique sign selected for , and applying (12) again returns and .
Furthermore,
The involution therefore exchanges even and odd and preserves the sign .
For , set
Pairing by (12) gives . In addition, simply separating even and odd values of and gives
Using and (13), we obtain
Finally, (5), (11) and imply
This proves the second congruence for every . Together with the previously proved modulo- congruence, it establishes all of Conjecture 4.1.