Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Riemann Zeta Function On Vertical Arithmetic Progressions Xiannan Li and Maksym Radziwiłł - Aistleitner-Munsch - Kristian Seip
The Riemann Zeta Function On Vertical Arithmetic Progressions Xiannan Li and Maksym Radziwiłł - Aistleitner-Munsch - Kristian Seip
We show that the twisted second moments of the Riemann zeta function averaged over
the arithmetic progression 1
2
+ i(an+ b) with a > 0, b real, exhibits a remarkable corre-
spondence with the analogous continuous average and derive several consequences. For
example, motivated by the linear independence conjecture, we show at least one third
of the elements in the arithmetic progression an+ b are not the ordinates of some zero
of ζ (s) lying on the critical line. This improves on an earlier work of Martin and Ng. We
then complement this result by producing large values of ζ (s) on arithmetic progres-
sions which are of the same quality as the best Ω results currently known for ζ ( 12 + it)
with t real.
1 Introduction
In this paper, we study the behavior of the Riemann zeta function ζ (s) in vertical arith-
metic progressions on the critical line. To be more precise, fix real numbers α > 0 and
β. We are interested in the distribution of values of ζ ( 21 + i(α + β)) as ranges over
the integers in some large dyadic interval [T, 2T]. Here are some specific questions
Received February 5, 2013; Revised August 21, 2013; Accepted August 22, 2013
c The Author(s) 2013. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions,
please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
326 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
of interest:
2T
(1) How does the mean square ∈[T,2T] |ζ ( 21 + i)|2 compare to T |ζ ( 21 + it)|2 dt?
(2) Does the mean square of ζ (s) distinguish arithmetic sequences? That is, does
∈[T,2T] |ζ ( 2 + i(α + β))| depend on α and β?
1 2
(3) What about the case ∈[T,2T] |ζ ( 21 + i(α + β))B( 12 + i(α + β))|2 , where B(s) is
an arbitrary Dirichlet polynomial? In the special when B(s) is a mollifier,
the continuous average of ζ ( 12 + it)B( 21 + it) has been shown to be close to
For most–but not all—values of α and β our results suggest that the average
behavior of ζ ( 12 + i(α + β)) is similar to that of a unitary family such as L( 12 ; χ ).
Besides being of independent interest the above three questions are motivated
by the linear independence conjecture, which we approach through two simpler ques-
tions:
The distribution of values of ζ (s) on the critical line has been studied extensively by
numerous authors and in particular the moments of ζ (s) have received much attention.
Here, much effort has gone into the study of the continuous moments both on the critical
line and to the right of the critical line. Generally, the study of such moments is easier
to conduct to the right of the critical line, and it is the critical line that holds the most
interest. For discrete averages of the type we consider, the fourth moment of ζ (s) has
been studied to the right of the critical line by Good [4]. Consider a Dirichlet polynomial
B(s) with,
b(n)
B(s) = and b(n) dA(n) (1)
θ
ns
n≤T
for some fixed, but arbitrary A > 0. Throughout, we will assume that the coefficients b(n)
are real.
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 327
Theorem 1. Let B(s) be as above. Let φ(·) be a smooth compactly supported function,
with support in [1, 2]. If θ < 12 , then as T → ∞,
1
1
2
2
ζ + i B
+ i · φ = ζ 1 + it B 1 + it · φ t dt
2 2 T 2 2 T
R
+ O A(T(log T)−A)).
Since ζ (s)B(s) oscillates on a scale of 2π/ log T it is interesting that we can recon-
with m/n = 1 denoting the smallest reduced fraction having a representation in the
form e2π/α for some > 0. Then we have the following asymptotic result for the second
moment of the Riemann zeta function.
Theorem 2. Let φ(·) be a smooth compactly supported function, with support in [1, 2].
Let α > 0 and β be real numbers. Then, as T → ∞,
1 2
2
ζ + i(α + β) ·φ = ζ 1 + i(αt + β) · φ t dt
2 T 2 T
R
· (1 + δ(α, β) + o(1)).
moment of the Riemann zeta-function off the half-line. See Propositions 1 and 2 for
more details.
In contrast to Theorem 2, the dependence on the diophantine properties of α
and β is nullified when B is a mollifier. To be precise, let φ(·) be a smooth compactly
supported function, with support in [1, 2], and define
μ(n) log n
Mθ (s) := · 1− .
θ
ns log T θ
n≤T
nontrivial zeros of ζ (s) should not lie in an arithmetic progression. To be more precise,
for fixed α > 0, β ∈ R, let
1 1
Pα,β (T) = · Card T ≤ ≤ 2T : ζ + i(α + β) = 0 .
T 2
Then what kind of lower bounds can we prove for Pα,β (T) for large T? Recently, improv-
ing on the work of numerous earlier authors, Martin and Ng [9] showed that Pα,β (T)
α,β
(log T)−1 which misses the truth by a factor of log T. In this paper, we prove the following
Pα,β (T) ≥ 1
3
+ o(1).
Theorem 5. Let α > 0 and β be real. Then, for infinitely many > 0,
The proofs of our theorems rest on a technical proposition, and its variant, which may
be of independent interest. With B(s) defined as in (1), consider the difference between
the discrete average and the continuous average,
2 2
1
E := (ζ · B) 1 + i(αt + β) φ t dt.
(ζ · B) 2 + i(α + β) φ T − 2 T
R
with G(w) an entire function of rapid decay along vertical lines G(x + iy) x,A |y|−A, such
that G(w) = G(−w), G(0) = 1, and satisfying G(w̄) = G(w) (to make W(x) real-valued for x
real). For example, we can take G(w) = ew . Note that W(x) 1 for x ≤ 1 and W(x) A x−A
2
for x > 1.
Of course, the expression E above should not depend on the choice of W. In fact,
F (al , bl , t) can also be written as
b(m)b(n)
(ma , nb )2
Proposition 1. Let 0 < θ < 12 . For each > 0, let (a , b ) denote (if it exists) the unique
tuple of co-prime integers such that a b > 1, b < T 1/2−ε e−π/α and
a 2π/α
− e2π/α ≤ e . (5)
b T 1−
∞
(a /b )iβ t α log ab
H () = √ φ · exp −2π it − · F (a , b , t) dt,
a b −∞ T 2π
E = 4Re H () + O(T 1−ε ).
>0
1 2
2
E = B 1 + i(αt + β) φ t dt.
B 2 + i(α + β) φ T − 2 T
R
332 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
b(a r)b(br)
F (a , b ) := ,
r≥1
r
where we adopted the convention that b(n) = 0 for n> T θ . Then the analog of Proposi-
tion 1 is stated below.
a 2π/α
− e2π/α ≤ e . (6)
b T 1−
Then,
(a /b )iβ α log ab
E = 2
√ · φ̂ − F (a , b ) + O(T 1−ε ),
>0
a b 2π
where in the summation over we omit the terms for which the pair (a , b ) does not
exist.
The proof of Proposition 2 is very similar (in fact easier!) than that of Proposi-
tion 1, and for this reason we omit it. To recover Good’s [4] result for the fourth moment
of the Riemann zeta-function off the half-line, we only need Proposition 2 for a Dirichlet
polynomial of length T ε .
One can ask about the typical distribution of log ζ ( 21 + i(α + β)) . This question
is out of reach if we focus on the real part of log ζ (s) since we cannot even guarantee
that almost all 1
2
+ i(α + β) are not zeros of the Riemann zeta-function. On the
Riemann Hypothesis, using Proposition 2 and Selberg’s methods, one can prove a cen-
tral limit theorem for S(α + β) with T ≤ ≤ 2T. We will not pursue this application
here.
We deduce Theorems 1 and 2 from Proposition 1 in Section 2. We then prove
Theorem 3 in Section 3, complete the proof of Theorem 4 in Section 4, and prove
Theorem 5 in Section 5. Finally, we prove Proposition 1 in Section 6.
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 333
1 c(a r)c(b r)
F (a , b , t) 1 + |b(k)b(h)| 1 + 1,
r r
r≥1 h,k≤T θ m,n≤T 1+ε 2
r≤T
mk=a r
nh=b r
E T(log T) B · (a b )−1/2+ε .
>0
πm
e − p ≥ exp(−272 log(2m) log p · log log p). (7)
q
Therefore, if condition (6) is satisfied then e2π T −1+ε ≥ exp(−c(log ) · (log a )(log log a ))
Therefore, using that ≤ (log log T)1+ε we obtain (log a ) · (log log a )
log T/(log log T)ε ,
and hence log a
log T/(log log T)1+ε . Note also that (6) implies that a b
e2π , so that
−α
>0 (a b ) = Oα (1) for any α > 0. Combining these observations we find
(a b )−1/2+ε e−c log T/(log log T) (a b )−1/4 e−c log T/(log log T)
1+ε 1+ε
.
0<<(log log T)1+ε >0
1 2
2
ζ
+ i(α + β) · φ = ζ 1 + i(αt + β) · φ t dt + E.
2 T 2 T
R
−1/2
It remains to show that >0 (a b )
= o(1) as T → ∞. Let ε > 0 be given. Since
a b
e
2π/α
we can find an A such that >A(a b )−1/2 ≤ ε. For the remaining integers
≤ A note that e2π/α is irrational for each ≤ A. Therefore, for each ≤ A,
a 2π/α
− e2π/α ≤ e (8)
b T 1−ε
implies that a b → ∞. It follows that ≤A(a b )−1/2 ≤ ε once T is large enough. We con-
clude that >0 (a b )−1/2 = o(1), and hence that E = o(T log T) as desired.
Case 2. Now consider the case that e2π0 /α is rational for some 0 . Write
2π 0
α= (9)
log(m/n)
with co-prime m and n and |m| minimal. Let k be the maximal positive integer such that
m/n= (r/s)k with r, s co-prime. Then,
0 2π
α= · .
k log(r/s)
Let d = (0 , k). Note that d = 1 since otherwise, we may replace 0 by 0 /d and m and n by
m1/d and n1/d in (9), which contradicts the minimality condition on |m|.
For each divisible by 0 the integers a = m/0 and b = n/0 satisfy (8) because
e2π/α = (m/n)/0 . For the remaining integers not divisible by 0 , e2π/α = (r/s)k/0 is
irrational, since 0 |k if and only if 0 |. We split E accordingly
E = 4Re H () + 4Re H ().
>0 >0
0 | 0
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 335
The second sum is o(T log T) as can be seen by repeating the same argument as in the
first case. As for the first sum, we find that for each divisible by 0 ,
/0
(m/n)iβ log mn
H () = 2 Re √ · φ̂(0)T log T + O · T .
mn (mn)/20
Therefore,
(m/n)iβ
3 Proof of Theorem 3
1
2π mn
F (a , b , t) := b(k)b(h) W .
r αt + β
r1 h,kT θ m,n1
mk=a r
nh=b r
The lemma below, provides a bound for F when the coefficients b(n) are the coefficients
of the mollifiers Mθ (s), that is,
log n
b(n) = μ(n) · 1 −
log T θ
Proof. For notational ease, let N = T θ . We first express the conditions in the sum above
in terms of Mellin transforms. To be specific since
1 dw
W(x) = x−w G(w)
2π (ε) w
336 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
with G(w) rapidly decaying along vertical lines, and such that G(w) = G(−w), G(0) = 1,
we have
1
1 αt + β w dw
S= b(h)b(k) G(w)
2π i (2) m,n≥1 h,k≤N r≥1
r 2π mn w
nk=b r
mh=a r
3
1 1 μ(h)μ(k) 1 αt + β w
=
dw N z1 dz1 N z2 dz2
× G(w) .
w log Nz12 log Nz22
The sum over m, n, h, k and r inside the integral may be factored into an Euler product as
⎛ ⎞⎛ ⎞
1 1 μ(k) 1 μ(h)
⎝ ⎠⎝ ⎠
r≥1
r nk=b r nw kz2 mh=a r
mw hz1
1 1 1
1 1
= 1+ − − F (a b , w, z1 , z2 )η(w, z1 , z2 ).
p
p pw pz2 pw pz1
Here, η(w, z1 , z2 ) is an Euler product which is absolutely convergent in the region delim-
ited by Re w, Re z1 , Re z2 > − 12 and we define
1 1 1 1 1 1
F (a b , w, z1 , z2 ) = − z 1+ − z
p( j−1)w pw p1 p1+w pw p2
p j ||a
1 1 1 1 1 1
× − z 1+ − z
p( j−1)w pw p2 p1+w pw p1
p j ||b
1 1 1
1 1
−1
× 1+ − − .
p pw pz2 pw pz1
pa b
1 1 1
1 1
ζ (1 + 2w)ζ (1 + z1 + z2 )
1+ w
− z w
− z η(w, z1 , z2 ) = η̃(w, z1 , z2 ),
p
p p p 2 p p 1 ζ (1 + w + z1 )ζ (1 + w + z2 )
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 337
where η̃ denotes an Euler product which is absolutely convergent in the region delimited
by Re w, Re z1 , Re z2 > − 12 and does not depend on a or b . Thus,
3 3
1 ζ (1 + 2w)ζ (1 + z1 + z2 ) αt + β w
S= η̃(w, z1 , z2 )F (a b , w, z1 , z2 )
2πi (2) ζ (1 + w + z! )ζ (1 + w + z2 ) 2π
dw N z1 dz1 N z2 dz2
× G(w)
w log Nz12 log Nz22
(a b )δ N 2δ+2δ
2
S = I1 + I2 + I3 + O
Tδ
with I1 , I2 , and I3 specified below. Since N < T 1/2−ε the error term is (a b )ε T −ε
provided that δ is chosen small enough. Writing
ζ (1 + z1 + z2 )
H (z1 , z2 ) = η̃(0, z1 , z2 )F (a b , 0, z1 , z2 )
ζ (1 + z1 )ζ (1 + z2 )
we have
log(αt + β) 1 N z1 dz1 N z2 dz2
I1 = H (z 1 , z2 ) · ,
2 (2π i)2 (1/4) (1/4) log Nz12 log Nz22
1 1 ζ ζ N z1 dz1 N z2 dz2
I2 = − (1 + z1 ) + (1 + z2 ) · H (z1 , z2 ) · ,
2 (2π i)2 (1/4) (1/4) ζ ζ log Nz12 log Nz22
and
1 1
d
dw
η̃(w, z1 , z2 )F (a b , w, z1 , z2 ) w=0
I3 =
2 (2π i)2 (1/4) (1/4) η̃(0, z1 , z2 )F (a b , 0, z1 , z2 )
N z1 dz1 N z2 dz2
· H (z1 , z2 ) · .
log Nz12 log Nz22
Bounding the integrals is now a standard exercise. As they can be bounded using the
exact same procedure, we will focus our attention to I1 (note, in particular, that I3 is
smaller by a factor of log T compared with the other integrals).
338 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
log(αt + β) 1 1
I1 = ζ (1 + z1 )−1 ζ (1 + z2 )−1 G(z1 , z2 )·
2 n≤N
n (2π i) 2
(1/ log N) (1/ log N)
z1 +z2
N dz1 dz2
· .
n log Nz1 log Nz22
2
Let M = exp(B(log log T)2 ) for B a parameter to be determined shortly. We split the sum
(a b )
log T(log M)5 (log N)−2 (a b ) .
(log T)1−
Now, for the terms with n≤ N/M, first truncate both contours at height log4 T
with an error (a b ) · (log T)−1 . Since a b > 1, we assume without loss of generality
that a > 1. This in turn implies that F (a b , 0, 0, z2 ) = 0, so that the integrand is holo-
morphic at z1 = 0. From the classical zero free region for ζ (s), there exists a constant
c > 0 such that (ζ (1 + z1 ))−1 < log(|z1 | + 1) for Re z1 ≥ −c(log log T)−1 and |Im z1 | ≤ log4 T.
We now shift the integral in z1 to Re z1 = −c(log log T)−1 with an error (a b )ε (log T)−1
and bound the remaining integral trivially by
−c
M log log T log T · (log log T)2 (a b ) exp(−cB log log T)(log T)1+ (a b ) .
Proof of Theorem 3. Let B(s) = Mθ (s) with 0 < θ < 12 . Inserting the bound in Lemma 1
into Proposition 1, we obtain
T 1
E · + O(T 1−ε ).
(log T) 1−ε
>0
(a b ) 1/2−ε
The sum over > 0 is rapidly convergent: Because of (6), we have a b e2π/α and there-
fore a b
e2π/α . It follows that the sum over > 0 contributes O(1) and we obtain
E T(log T)−1+ε as desired.
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 339
4 Proof of Theorem 4
Recall that
b(n)
Mθ (s) :=
n≥1
ns
with coefficients
1
1
I := ζ + i(α + β) Mθ + i(α + β) φ , (10)
2 2 T
1
1
2
J :=
ζ 2 + i(α + β) Mθ 2 + i(α + β) φ T .
Then our Theorem 4 follows from the following Proposition 3 and Theorem 3.
Proposition 3. Let α > 0, β be real numbers. With I as defined in (10), and for T large,
T
|I| = T φ̂(0) + O .
log T
1 1 1
ζ + it = +O ,
2 n≤2aT
n1/2+it T 1/2
340 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
1
I= · M( 21 + i(α + β))φ + O(T θ/2+1/2+ )
n≤2αT
n1/2+i(α+β) T
b(m) 1
−ib −ia
= √ √ · (mn) (mn) φ + O(T 3/4 )
θ
m n≤2αT n
T
m≤T
b(m) 1
α log(mn)
= √ √ · (mn)−ib T φ̂ T − + O(T 3/4 ),
for some integer n0 > 1, and fix such a n0 The term mn= n0 contributes
T
1/2+ib
b(m)φ̂(T(α log(n0 ) − ))
n0 m|n0
T d(n0 ) log n0
a · √
log T n0
d(n0 ) log n0
b(m)
m|n0
log T
For a fixed , the number of n0 satisfying (11) is bounded by n0 T −1+ε + 1. Thus, the total
contribution of all the terms is
1/2+ε
n0 d(n0 ) log n0 d(n0 ) log n0
T · Tε + T √ T 3/4+ε + T √ .
T n0 log T n0 log T
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 341
We sum this over all the || log(2αT 1+θ ). Such a short sum does not affect the size
of the first term above. As for the second term, since n0 e2πa , the sum over = 0 is
bounded by
T || T
|aπ|(1−)
.
log T ||>0 e log T
1/2
1
φ̂(0)T(1 + o(1)) ≤ (Pα,β (T) · T) 1/2
· T· + 1 + o(1) .
θ
Hence,
θ
Pα,β (T) ≥ φ̂(0) + o(1)
θ +1
for all 0 < θ < 12 . Now we set φ(t) = 1 for t ∈ [1 + , 2 − ] so that φ̂(0) ≥ 1 − 2. Letting
1−
θ→ 2
and → 0, we obtain the claim.
Lemma 2. We have,
1 2
Mθ + i(α + β) φ T log T.
2 T
Proof. Using Proposition 2, we find that the above second moment is equal to
2
1
Mθ 1 + i(αt + β) φ t dt + O T φ̂(0) √
· |F (a , b )| ,
2 T ab
R >0
342 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
where a and b denote for each > 0 the unique (if it exists!) couple of co-prime integers
such that a b > 1, b < T 1/2−ε e−π/α and
a 2π/α
− e2π/α ≤ e
b T 1−ε
and where
b(a r)b(br)
F (a , b ) = log T
r
since the coefficients of Mθ are bounded by 1 in absolute value. Since R |Mθ ( 12 +
i(αt + β))|2 φ(t/T) dt T log T the claim follows.
Proof of the Corollary. Following [7], let H0 be the set of integers T ≤ ≤ 2T at which,
and let H1 be the set of integers at which the reverse inequality holds. Note that,
1 1
C0 := ζ + i(α + β) Mθ + i(α + β) φ
∈H0 2 2 T
2 1/2
1
≤ ε(log T) −1/2
·
Mθ 2 + i(α + β) φ T ≤ C εT φ̂(0)
1/2
T
for some absolute constant C > 0. Hence by Proposition 3 and the Triangle Inequality,
1 1
C1 := ζ + i(α + β) Mθ + i(α + β) φ ≥ (1 − C ε)φ̂(0)T
∈H1 2 2 T
1 − Cε
|H1 | ≥ φ̂(0) T.
1 + 1/θ
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 343
1−
Taking θ → 2
and letting φ(t) = 1 on t ∈ [1 + ε; 2 − ε], so that φ̂(0) ≥ 1 − 2ε we obtain the
claim on taking ε → 0.
and let
B(s) = b(n)n−s
n≤N
and a b > 1 and both a and b are less than T 1/2−ε . In particular, for each , there is at
most one such tuple so |S1 | ≤ 2 log T. From each tuple in S1 we pick one prime divisor of
a and one prime divisor of b and put them into a set we call S.
We define our resonator coefficients r(n) by setting L = log N log log N and
L
r( p) = √
plog p
a(n)
Lemma 3. Write D(s) = n≤T ns
with the coefficients a(n) 1. If N = T 1/2−δ with δ >
10ε, then,
2
1 1
D + i(α + β) B + i(α + β) φ
2 2 T
2
1 1 t
= D
+ i(αt + β) B + i(αt + β) φ dt
R 2 2 T
2
1 1
D + i(α + β) B + i(α + β) φ
2 2 T
The term = 0 contributes the main term (the continuous average). It remains to bound
the remaining terms = 0. Since φ̂(x) (1 + |x|)−A the only surviving terms are those for
which,
α log nh
m 1
− ≤ 1−ε
2π T
which in particular implies that || ≤ 2 log T. We split our sum into two ranges, nh <
T 1/2− and nh > T 1/2− .
First range. In the first range, for (m, nh) = 1, the real numbers log m/(nh) are
spaced by at least T −1+ε apart. Among all co-prime tuples with both a and b less than
T 1/2−ε there is at most one tuple satisfying,
α log a
b 1
− ≤ 1−ε .
2π T
m iβ
1 1 α log nh
m
T √ b(m)b(n)a(h) φ̂ T − .
=0
a b r r m,n≤N
nh 2π
nh≤T 1/2−ε
m=a r
nh=b r
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 345
Putting this together we have the following bound for the sum over nh > T 1/2−ε ,
|b(m)|2
T 1−δ/2+3ε · N .
n≤N
n
Then
|b(m)|2 L2
≤ 1+ 2
Tε
n≤N
m 2 plog p
p≥L
because L 2 p>L 2 p−1 (log p)−2 log N/ log log N = o(log T). Therefore, the sum in the
second range is bounded by T 1−δ/2+4ε N = T 1+(1−3δ)/2+4ε .
plus a negligible error term. The above ratio was already worked out by Soundararajan
in [11] (see Theorem 2.1). Proceeding in the same way, we obtain that the above ratio is
equal to,
b( p)
R = (1 + o(1)) 1+ .
p
p
Since
L L log N
=o
plog p plog p log log N
p∈S L 2 ≤ p≤L 2 +2 log T
346 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
we find that
log N
R = exp (1 + o(1)) .
log log N
smooth function
1 dw
W(x) := x−w G(w) · .
2π (ε) w
Remark. Of course, we could work with the usual smoothing V involving the Gamma
factors on the Mellin transform side. We believe the smoothing W(2π mn/t) to be
(slightly) more transparent.
with gt (w) = Γ ( 14 + it
2
+ w2 )Γ ( 14 − it
2
+ w2 )/(Γ ( 14 + it2 )Γ ( 14 − it2 )) By Stirling’s formula gt (w) =
(t/2)w · (1 + O((1 + |w|2 )/t)) uniformly for w lying in any fixed half-plane and t large.
Using Weyl’s subconvexity bound, on the line Re w = ε, we have ζ ( 12 + it + w)ζ ( 12 − it + w)
|t|1/3 + |w|1/3 . Therefore, the error term O((1 + |w|2 )/t) in Stirling’s approximation con-
tributes an error term of O(T −2/3 ) in (12). Thus,
2 w
ζ 1 + it = 2 ζ
1
+ it + w ζ
1
− it + w ·
t
G(w) ·
dw
+ O(T −2/3 ).
2 2π i (ε) 2 2 2π w
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 347
Note that W(x) = O A(x−A) for x > 1. Since T ≤ t ≤ 2T if mn> T 1+ε then 2π mn/t
T ε .
Therefore,
1 2
J := ζ + i(α + β) B
1
+ i(α + β) ·φ
2 2 T
∈Z
1 b(h)b(k) mh i(α+β) 2π mn
=2 √ √ W φ + O(T 5/6+ε )
mn θ hk ∈Z
nk α + β T
mn<T 1+ε h,kT
1 b(h)b(k) mh iβ α log mh
=2 √ √ · fˆm,n,T nk
− + O(T 5/6+ε ) (13)
mn hk nk 2π
mn<T 1+ε h,kT θ ∈Z
1 b(h)b(k) mk i(αt+β) 2π mn t
=2 √ √ · W φ dt.
mn θ hk R nh αt + β T
mn<T 1+ε h,k≤T
348 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
Therefore, (14) is
2
B 1 + i(αt + β) ζ 1 + i(αt + β) φ t dt + O T 1−ε
2 2 T
R
as desired.
Since
α log mh α log mh
nk
fˆm,n,T nk ˆ
+ = fm,n,T −
2π 2π
Differentiating repeatedly and using that W and all derivatives of W are Schwarz class,
(k)
we find that for mn< T 1+ε , fm,n,T (x) T −k for all x. Therefore, for any fixed A > 0,
It follows that the only integers m, n, k, h, and that contribute to J0 are the m, n, k, h,
and for which
α mh
−1+η
2π · log nk − ≤ T ,
for some small, but arbitrary η > 0. This condition implies that
mh
2π/α 2π/α −1+η
nk − e ≤e T (15)
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 349
and we might as well restrict the sum in J0 to those m, n, k, h, and satisfying this
weaker, but friendlier, condition. Thus,
iβ
b(h)b(k) mk α log mk 1
J0 = 4 Re √ · fˆm,n,T nh
− + OA . (16)
>0
mnhk nh 2π TA
mn<T 1+ε
h,k≤T θ
m,n,h,k satisfy (15)
Now, for a fixed > 0, consider the inner sum over m, n, h, and k in (16). We group
iβ
b(h)b(k) a α log(a /b )
J0 = 4Re √ · · fˆm,n,T − . (18)
>0 a ,b 1 r1 mnT 1+ε
mknh b 2π
(a ,b )=1 h,kT θ
satisfy (17) nh=a r
mk=b r
It is useful to have a bound for the size of b in the above sum. Equation (17) implies that
a b · e2π/α . Furthermore, since mn< T 1+ε , h, k T θ and a r = mk, b r = nh, we have a ·
b < mnkh < T 1+2θ+ε . Combining a b · e2π/α and a b < T 1+2θ+ε , we obtain b < T 1/2+θ+ε ·
e−π/α . Let
K := T 1/2−η e−π/α ,
M := T 1/2+θ+ε e−π/α .
(a /b )iβ 1 α log(a /b )
J0 = 4Re √ fˆm,n,T − = 4Re (S1 + S2 ),
>0 b <M
a b r1 r 2π
mnT 1+ε
a 1 h,kT θ
(a ,b )=1 nh=b r
satisfy (17) mk=a r
where S1 is the sum over b ≤ K and S2 is the corresponding sum over M > b > K . To
finish the proof of the proposition it remains to evaluate S1 and S2 . The sum S1 can give a
350 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
main term contribution in the context of Theorem 2 depending on the Diophantine prop-
erties of a, while bounding S1 as an error term in the context of Theorem 4 is relatively
subtle. In contrast, S2 is always negligible.
We first furnish the following expression for S1 .
Lemma 5. For each > 0 there is at most one tuple of co-prime integers (a , b ) such
that a b > 1 , b < K = T 1/2−η e−π/α and such that
∗
We denote by the sum over ’s satisfying the above condition. Then,
∗ (a /b )iβ ∞ t α log ab
S1 = T · √ φ · exp −2π it − · F (a , b , t) dt,
>0
a b −∞ T 2π
where
1
αt + β
F (a , b , t) := b(h)b(k) W
r 2π mn
h,k≤T θ r≥1 m,n≥1
mk=a r
nh=b r
b(m)b(n)
(ma , nb )2
= · (ma , nb ) · H (αt + β) ·
θ
mn 2π ma nb
m,n≤T
and
⎧1
⎨ · log x + γ + O A(x−A) if x
1,
1 dw
H(x) = ζ (1 + 2w) · xw G(w) · = 2
2π i w ⎩
(ε) O A(x A) if x 1.
Proof. Given , there is at most one b K for which there is a co-prime a such
that (19) holds, because Farey fractions with denominator < K are spaced at least
K−2 = e2π/α T −1+2η far apart. Thus, for each , the sum over a and b in S1 consists of
at most one element (a , b ),
∞
2π mn t
fˆm,n,T (x) = W φ e−2πixt dt.
−∞ αt + β T
∗ (a /b )ib ∞ t α log mh
T √ φ exp −2π it nk
−
1
2π mn
· b(h)b(k) W dt.
r θ 1+ε
αt + β
r1 h,kT mn<T
nh=b r,mk=a r
Since W(x) x−A, for x > 1 and at + b T, we complete the sum over mn< T 1+ε to
m, n 1 making a negligible error term A T −A. To finish the proof it remains to under-
stand the expression
1
2π mn
b(h)b(k) W . (20)
r αt + β
h,k≤T θ r m,n≥1
mk=a r
nh=b r
We note that
1
2π mn 1 1 1 αt + β w dw
W = · G(w) . (21)
r
r m,n≥1
αt + β 2π (ε) r r m,n≥1 (mn)w 2π w
nh=b r nh=b r
mk=a r mk=a r
Furthermore, nh = br and mk = ar imply that mkb = nha . On the other hand, since
a and b are co-prime the equality mkb = nha implies that there exists a unique r
such that nh = br and mk = a r. We note as well that this unique r can be expressed
as ((a b )/(mknh))−1/2 . Therefore, we have the equality,
1 1 1 a b
= · .
r
r m,n≥1
(mn)w m,n≥1
(mn)w mknh
nh=b r nha =mkb
mk=a r
We express the condition nha = mkb as ha |kb m and n= kb m/(ha ) so as to reduce the
double sum over m, n to a single sum over m. Furthermore, the condition ha |kb m can be
dealt with by noticing that it is equivalent to ha /(ha , kb )|m. Using these observations
352 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
we find that,
w
1 a b (ha , kb ) (ha , kb )2
· = · ζ (1 + 2w) · .
m,n≥1
(mn)w mknh hk ha kb
nha =mkb
1
2π mn (ha , kb ) αt + β
W = ·H .
1
An easy calculation reveals that H(x) = 2
log x + γ + O A(x−A) for x
1 and that
H(x) = O A(x A) for x 1. We conclude that Equation (20) equals
b(h)b(k)
αt + β
· (ha , kb ) · H
θ
hk 2π mn
h,k≤T
as desired.
Proof. Recall that the a and b are always assumed to satisfy the condition
a 2π/α
− e2π/α ≤ e
b T 1−η . (22)
K := T 1/2−η e−π/α ,
M := T 1/2+θ+ε e−π/α .
Then,
(a /b )iβ 1 α log(a /b )
S2 = √ b(h)b(k) fˆm,n,T − . (23)
∈Z K <b <M
a b r1 r h,kT θ 2π
mnT 1+ε
a 1 nh=b r
(a ,b )=1 mk=a r
satisfy (22)
The Riemann Zeta Function on Vertical Arithmetic Progressions 353
We split the above sum into dyadic blocks b N with K < N < M . The number of
(a , b ) = 1 with b N and satisfying (22) is bounded by
e2π/α
· N2 + 1
T 1−η
because Farey fractions with denominators of size N are spaced at least N −2 apart.
Therefore, for a fixed , using the bounds b(n) nε and fˆm,n,T (x) T, the dyadic block
with b N contributes at most,
because
1 d(a r)d(br)
1= (Ta b )ε .
2
r m,h,k,n 2
r
r≤T r≤T
mh=a r
nk=b r
Keeping fixed and summing over all possible dyadic blocks K < N < M shows that for
fixed the inner sum in (23) is bounded by
The condition (22) restricts to 0 < < 2α log T. Summing (25) over all 0 < < 2α log T
we find that S2 is bounded by T 1/2+θ+2ε+η + T 1/2+η+ε . Since θ < 1
2
and we can take η, ε
arbitrarily small, but fixed, the claim follows.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Professor Soundararajan for a number of useful remarks on a draft
of this paper. This work was done while both authors were visiting the Centre de Recherches
Mathématiques. We are grateful for their kind hospitality.
354 X. Li and M. Radziwiłł
Funding
This work was partially supported by a NSERC PGS-D award (to M.R.).
References
[1] Balasubramanian, R., J. B. Conrey, and D. R. Heath-Brown. “Asymptotic mean square of the
product of the Riemann zeta-function and a Dirichlet polynomial.” Journal für die Reine
und Angewandte Mathematik, no. 357 (1985): 161–81.
[2] Bui, H. “Non-vanishing of Dirichlet L-functions at the central point.” International Journal