1988
DOI: 10.4064/aa-49-5-435-447
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the difference between consecutive squarefree integers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
17
0

Year Published

1989
1989
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Theorem 1 for k = 2 was first established by the authors in [11] and for general k was first established by the second author in [49]. For k = 2, this result improves on work by Fogels [13], Roth [39], Richert [38], Rankin [37], Schmidt [41], Graham and Kolesnik [16], the second author [46,47], the first author [6], and the authors jointly [10]. For general k, this result improves on work by Halberstam and Roth [18], the first author [5], and the second author [48].…”
Section: X X + H] Is Hlc(k) + O(h)supporting
confidence: 52%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Theorem 1 for k = 2 was first established by the authors in [11] and for general k was first established by the second author in [49]. For k = 2, this result improves on work by Fogels [13], Roth [39], Richert [38], Rankin [37], Schmidt [41], Graham and Kolesnik [16], the second author [46,47], the first author [6], and the authors jointly [10]. For general k, this result improves on work by Halberstam and Roth [18], the first author [5], and the second author [48].…”
Section: X X + H] Is Hlc(k) + O(h)supporting
confidence: 52%
“…This equation holds for every choice of / and /' with O^y < / ' «£ 2k. With / = 0 and ;' = 1, the equation is analogous to the situation we had in (16). A precisely analogous argument to what followed in the remainder of that paragraph leads us to deduce that we cannot have the 2/c + 1 numbers p, p + a u ..., p + a, + ... + a 2k above; in other words, we obtain a contradiction to the assumption that (i) and (ii) do not hold.…”
Section: N-2mentioning
confidence: 92%
“…There followed papers by Richert 〈〉, Rankin 〈〉, Schmidt 〈〉, Graham and Kolesnik 〈〉, Trifonov 〈〉 and Filaseta 〈〉, many of them quite technical.…”
Section: Early Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Estimates for b 16 are given in Table 1. Estimate for b = 1 belongs to Huxley [5], and estimate for b = 2 belongs to Graham and Kolesnik [4]. We have found no references on the best known results for b 3, so we calculated them with the use of [8, Th.…”
Section: Preliminary Estimatesmentioning
confidence: 99%