Fully powered mixed-ratio conjecture for arithmetic functions

Less than 1 year old · traced to

Let φ(n)\varphi(n), ψ(n)\psi(n) and σ(n)\sigma(n) denote the Euler totient, Dedekind psi and sum-of-divisors functions, respectively. For integers k≥1k\geq1 and n≥2n\geq2, form the three quantities φk(n)(ψk(n)+σk(n))\varphi^k(n)(\psi^k(n)+\sigma^k(n)), ψk(n)(φk(n)+σk(n))\psi^k(n)(\varphi^k(n)+\sigma^k(n)) and σk(n)(φk(n)+ψk(n))\sigma^k(n)(\varphi^k(n)+\psi^k(n)). Fully powered mixed-ratio conjecture. For every integers k≥1k\geq1 and n≥2n\geq2, we have

φk(n)(ψk(n)+σk(n))ψk(n)(φk(n)+σk(n))+σk(n)(φk(n)+ψk(n))+ψk(n)(φk(n)+σk(n))φk(n)(ψk(n)+σk(n))+σk(n)(φk(n)+ψk(n))+σk(n)(φk(n)+ψk(n))φk(n)(ψk(n)+σk(n))+ψk(n)(φk(n)+σk(n))≥5(n−1)2k+5(n2−1)k+2(n+1)2k(3(n−1)k+(n+1)k)((n−1)k+(n+1)k).\frac{\varphi^k(n)(\psi^k(n)+\sigma^k(n))}{\psi^k(n)(\varphi^k(n)+\sigma^k(n))+\sigma^k(n)(\varphi^k(n)+\psi^k(n))}+\frac{\psi^k(n)(\varphi^k(n)+\sigma^k(n))}{\varphi^k(n)(\psi^k(n)+\sigma^k(n))+\sigma^k(n)(\varphi^k(n)+\psi^k(n))}+\frac{\sigma^k(n)(\varphi^k(n)+\psi^k(n))}{\varphi^k(n)(\psi^k(n)+\sigma^k(n))+\psi^k(n)(\varphi^k(n)+\sigma^k(n))}\geq\frac{5(n-1)^{2k}+5(n^2-1)^k+2(n+1)^{2k}}{\big(3(n-1)^k+(n+1)^k\big)\big((n-1)^k+(n+1)^k\big)}.

This proposed inequality is not resolved in the supplied text.

References

Primary source

S. I. Dimitrov, “Lower bounds on expressions depending on the functions φ(n), ψ(n) and σ(n), III”, arXiv:2606.12484 (2026).

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

A reader-written complete-proof attempt appeared, but no independent source has checked it, so the conjecture is not established.

S. I. Dimitrov’s June 2026 preprint records the inequality as Conjecture 9 for all k≥1k \geq 1 and n≥2n \geq 2. The preprint supplies no proof or counterexample.

Posted attempt

A reader-written argument claims a complete proof: after setting x=φ(n)kx=\varphi(n)^k, y=ψ(n)ky=\psi(n)^k, z=σ(n)kz=\sigma(n)^k, it asserts 0<x≤(n−1)k<(n+1)k≤y≤z0<x\leq(n-1)^k<(n+1)^k\leq y\leq z, proves monotonicity of the resulting expression, and obtains the conjectured bound. The attempt has not been independently verified.

Current status (as of August 2026): The conjecture is recorded in a June 2026 preprint, while a complete proof has been posted in discussion but remains unverified; no verified proof or counterexample is known.

Sources

Solutions 1

ProofThis solution needs a summarySee full solutionHide full solution

Complete proof for every n≥2n\ge2 and k≥1k\ge1.

Set

x=φ(n)k,y=ψ(n)k,z=σ(n)k,a=(n−1)k,b=(n+1)k.x=\varphi(n)^k,\quad y=\psi(n)^k,\quad z=\sigma(n)^k,\quad a=(n-1)^k,\quad b=(n+1)^k.

The Euler-product formulas imply 0<x≤a<b≤y≤z0<x\le a<b\le y\le z: indeed, φ(n)≤n−1\varphi(n)\le n-1, ψ(n)≥n+1\psi(n)\ge n+1, and σ(pe)≥pe+pe−1=ψ(pe)\sigma(p^e)\ge p^e+p^{e-1}=\psi(p^e).

Put

A=x(y+z),B=y(x+z),C=z(x+y),G=AB+C+BA+C+CA+B.A=x(y+z),\quad B=y(x+z),\quad C=z(x+y),\qquad G=\frac A{B+C}+\frac B{A+C}+\frac C{A+B}.

By homogeneity let r=x/yr=x/y and t=z/yt=z/y, so 0<r≤a/b<10<r\le a/b<1, t≥1t\ge1. A direct common-denominator computation gives

G(r,t)−G(r,1)=r(t−1)P(r,t−1)(r+1)(3r+1)(rt+r+2t)(rt+2r+t)(2rt+r+t),G(r,t)-G(r,1) =\frac{r(t-1)P(r,t-1)} {(r+1)(3r+1)(rt+r+2t)(rt+2r+t)(2rt+r+t)},

where

P(r,v)=(2r4+4r3+7r2+8r+3)v2+(4r4−5r3+8r2+19r+6)v+(1−r)(3r+1)(5r+3).\begin{aligned} P(r,v)={}&(2r^4+4r^3+7r^2+8r+3)v^2\\ &+(4r^4-5r^3+8r^2+19r+6)v\\ &+(1-r)(3r+1)(5r+3). \end{aligned}

Every denominator factor is positive. All coefficients of PP are nonnegative for 0<r≤10<r\le1, since its linear coefficient equals

4r4+5r2(1−r)+3r2+19r+6>0.4r^4+5r^2(1-r)+3r^2+19r+6>0.

Thus G(r,t)≥G(r,1)G(r,t)\ge G(r,1). Moreover,

G(r,1)=rr+1+2(r+1)3r+1,ddrG(r,1)=(r−1)(5r+3)(r+1)2(3r+1)2≤0.G(r,1)=\frac r{r+1}+\frac{2(r+1)}{3r+1},\qquad \frac{d}{dr}G(r,1) =\frac{(r-1)(5r+3)}{(r+1)^2(3r+1)^2}\le0.

Since r≤a/br\le a/b,

G≥G(a/b,1)=5a2+5ab+2b2(3a+b)(a+b)=5(n−1)2k+5(n2−1)k+2(n+1)2k(3(n−1)k+(n+1)k)((n−1)k+(n+1)k).G\ge G(a/b,1) =\frac{5a^2+5ab+2b^2}{(3a+b)(a+b)} = \frac{5(n-1)^{2k}+5(n^2-1)^k+2(n+1)^{2k}} {\big(3(n-1)^k+(n+1)^k\big)\big((n-1)^k+(n+1)^k\big)}.

This is the stated conjecture in full generality. Equality holds exactly when nn is prime.