Uniqueness of the -primitive decomposition for fixed square-free part

Less than 1 year old · traced to

Let s∈Ns\in\mathbb{N} be square-free, and let P(s)P(s) be the set of Δ\Delta-primitives with square-free part ss. A natural number nn has a Δ\Delta-primitive decomposition if it can be written as n=α2mn=\alpha^2m with α∈N\alpha\in\mathbb{N} and mm Δ\Delta-primitive. Fixed-square-free-part uniqueness conjecture. If ∣P(s)∣=1|P(s)|=1, then every non-square n∈N(Δ)n\in\mathbb{N}(\Delta) with square-free part ss admits a unique Δ\Delta-primitive decomposition. The conjecture refines a uniqueness question that is false in general: the paper gives 5616=32⋅624=22⋅14045616=3^2\cdot624=2^2\cdot1404 as the smallest counterexample, while the classification of integers with multiple decompositions remains open.

References

Primary source

Victor N. Schvöllner, “The Δ property: a bridge between split graphs and Number Theory”, arXiv:2605.25264 (2026).

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

A reader-posted complete proof claims the conjecture follows immediately from the uniqueness of the primitive with a given square-free part, but nobody has independently checked it.

The conjecture asserts that fixing a square-free part and requiring exactly one primitive representative forces every nonsquare with that part to have one decomposition. The source paper also records that unrestricted uniqueness fails, with the example 5616=32⋅624=22⋅14045616=3^2\cdot624=2^2\cdot1404.

Posted attempt

A reader-posted argument claims a complete proof: square-free parts are unchanged by multiplying by squares, so two decompositions would yield two members of P(s)P(s); if ∣P(s)∣=1|P(s)|=1, their primitive factors and then their square factors coincide. It also claims the nonsquare hypothesis is unnecessary and gives a converse construction when P(s)P(s) has multiple elements. The argument has not been independently verified.

Current status (as of August 2026): the conjecture has an unverified complete-proof claim, but no independent verification is recorded; absent that verification, its mathematical status remains open.

Sources

Solutions 1

ProofThis solution needs a summarySee full solutionHide full solution

Complete proof. For a positive integer u=∏ppepu=\prod_p p^{e_p}, let

sf⁡(u)=∏ep oddp\operatorname{sf}(u)=\prod_{e_p\text{ odd}}p

denote its square-free part. For every positive integer cc,

sf⁡(c2u)=sf⁡(u).\operatorname{sf}(c^2u)=\operatorname{sf}(u).

Proposition 3.2 of the source establishes that every n∈N(Δ)n\in\mathbb N(\Delta) admits a decomposition n=c2mn=c^2m, where c≥1c\ge1 and mm is Δ\Delta-primitive. Equivalently, repeatedly remove a nontrivial square factor whenever its quotient remains in N(Δ)\mathbb N(\Delta). The positive quotients strictly decrease, so the process terminates at a primitive quotient.

Fix a square-free ss with ∣P(s)∣=1|P(s)|=1, and suppose n∈N(Δ)n\in\mathbb N(\Delta) has square-free part ss. If

n=c12m1=c22m2n=c_1^2m_1=c_2^2m_2

are primitive decompositions, square-free-part invariance gives

sf⁡(m1)=sf⁡(n)=s=sf⁡(m2).\operatorname{sf}(m_1)=\operatorname{sf}(n)=s=\operatorname{sf}(m_2).

Thus m1,m2∈P(s)m_1,m_2\in P(s). Since P(s)P(s) is a singleton, m1=m2m_1=m_2; consequently c12=c22c_1^2=c_2^2, and positivity gives c1=c2c_1=c_2. The decomposition therefore exists and is unique. The nonsquare assumption is unnecessary.

More precisely, writing n=su2n=su^2, its primitive decompositions are in bijection with

{d∣u:sd2∈P(s)}\{d\mid u:sd^2\in P(s)\}

via m=sd2m=sd^2 and c=u/dc=u/d. Conversely, if P(s)P(s) contains distinct mi=sdi2m_i=sd_i^2, then

N=s lcm⁡(d1,d2)2N=s\,\operatorname{lcm}(d_1,d_2)^2

has two distinct primitive decompositions, and every square multiple of NN does as well. For s>1s>1, all these examples are nonsquares.