Abstract
Let \((F_n)\) be the sequence of Fibonacci numbers and, for each positive integer k, let \({\mathcal {P}}_k\) be the set of primes p such that \(\gcd (p - 1, F_{p - 1}) = k\). We prove that the relative density \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {P}}_k)\) of \({\mathcal {P}}_k\) exists, and we give a formula for \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {P}}_k)\) in terms of an absolutely convergent series. Furthermore, we give an effective criterion to establish if a given k satisfies \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {P}}_k) > 0\), and we provide upper and lower bounds for the counting function of the set of such k’s. As an application of our results, we give a new proof of a lower bound for the counting function of the set of integers of the form \(\gcd (n, F_n)\), for some positive integer n. Our proof is more elementary than the previous one given by Leonetti and Sanna, which relies on a result of Cubre and Rouse.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Let \((u_n)\) be a non-degenerate linear recurrence with integral values. Several authors studied the arithmetic relations between \(u_n\) and n. For instance, under the mild hypothesis that the characteristic polynomial of \((u_n)\) has only simple roots, Alba González et al. [1] studied the set of positive integers n such that \(u_n\) is divisible by n. The same set was also studied by André-Jeannin [2], Luca and Tron [12], Sanna [16], and Somer [20], in the special case in which \((u_n)\) is a Lucas sequence. Furthermore, Sanna [17] studied the set of natural numbers n such that \(\gcd (n, u_n) = 1\) (see [14] for a generalization, and [23] for a survey on g.c.d.’s of linear recurrences). Similar problems, with \((u_n)\) replaced by an elliptic divisibility sequence or by the orbit of a polynomial map, were also studied [3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 19].
Let \((F_n)\) be the linear recurrence of Fibonacci numbers, which is defined as usual by \(F_1 = F_2 = 1\) and \(F_{n+2} = F_{n+1} + F_n\) for all positive integers n. For every positive integer k, define the following set of natural numbers
Recall that the natural density \(\varvec{d}({\mathcal {S}})\) of a set of positive integers \({\mathcal {S}}\) is defined as the limit of the ratio \(\#\big ({\mathcal {S}} \cap [1, x]\big ) / x\) as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \), whenever this limit exists. Sanna and Tron [18] proved that each \({\mathcal {A}}_k\) has a natural density, which can be written as an infinite series, and they provided an effective criterion to determine if such density is positive.
We consider similar results but for the set of shifted primes \(p - 1\). (Throughout, we reserve the letter p for prime numbers.) Shifted primes already make their appearance in relation to Fibonacci numbers. For instance, it is well known that p divides \(F_{p - 1}\) for every prime number \(p \equiv \pm 1 \pmod 5\). For each integer \(k \ge 1\), define the following set of prime numbers
Recall that the relative density \({\textbf{r}}({\mathcal {P}})\) of a set of prime numbers \({\mathcal {P}}\) is defined as the limit of the ratio \(\#({\mathcal {P}} \cap [1, x]) / \pi (x)\) as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \), whenever this limit exists, where \(\pi (x)\) denotes the number of primes not exceeding x. Let z(m) denote the rank of appearance, or entry point, of a positive integer m in the sequence of Fibonacci numbers, that is, the smallest positive integer n such that m divides \(F_{n}\). It is well known that z(m) exists. Also, let \(\ell (m)=\mathop {\textrm{lcm}}\limits \!\big (m,z(m)\big )\).
Our first result establishes the existence of the relative density of \({\mathcal {P}}_k\) and provides a criterion to check if such a density is positive.
Theorem 1.1
For each positive integer k, the relative density of \({\mathcal {P}}_k\) exists. Moreover, if \(\gcd \!\big (\ell (k),F_{\ell (k)}\big ) \ne k\), or if \(2 \not \mid \ell (k)\) and \(\ell (pk) = 2\,\ell (k)\) for some prime number p with \(p \not \mid k\), then \({\mathcal {P}}_k \subseteq \{2\}\). Otherwise, we have that \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {P}}_k) > 0\).
For instance, \(k = 17\) is the smallest positive integer such that \(\varvec{d}({\mathcal {A}}_k) > 0\), since \(\gcd \!\big (\ell (k),F_{\ell (k)}\big ) = k\) (see Lemma 3.3 below) but \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {P}}_k) = 0\), since \(\ell (k) = 153\) is odd and \(\ell (pk) = 2\,\ell (k)\) for \(p = 2\).
Our second result gives an explicit expression for the relative density of \({\mathcal {P}}_k\) in terms of an absolutely convergent series.
Theorem 1.2
For each positive integer k, the relative density of \({\mathcal {P}}_k\) is
where \(\mu \) is the Möbius function, \(\varphi \) is the Euler totient function, and the series converges absolutely.
Leonetti and Sanna [11] proved the following upper and lower bounds for the counting function of the set \({\mathcal {A}} := \{\gcd (n, F_n) : n \ge 1\}\).
Theorem 1.3
We have
as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \).
As an application of Theorem 1.1, we provide an alternative proof of the lower bound in (1). We remark that our proof uses quite elementary methods, while Leonetti and Sanna’s proof relies on a result of Cubre and Rouse [4], which in turn is proved by Galois theory and Chebotarev’s density theorem.
Let \({\mathcal {K}}\) be the set of positive integers k such that \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {P}}_k) > 0\). We have the following upper and lower bounds for the counting function of \({\mathcal {K}}\).
Proposition 1.4
We have
as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \).
We remark that both Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 can be generalized to non-degenerate Lucas sequences, that is, integer sequences \((u_n)\) such that \(u_1 = 1\), \(u_2 = a_1\), and \(u_n = a_1 u_{n - 1} + a_2 u_{n - 2}\), for every integer \(n \ge 2\), where \(a_1, a_2\) are non-zero relatively prime integers such that the ratio of the roots of \(X^2 - a_1 X - a_2\) is not a root of unity. We decided to focus on the sequence of Fibonacci numbers in order to simplify the exposition.
A generalization in another direction could be studying the sets of primes
for integers \(k \ge 1\) and s.
2 Preliminaries on primes in certain residue classes
We shall need a mild generalization (Theorem 2.2 below) of a result of Leonetti and Sanna [10] on primes in certain residue classes. First, we have to introduce some notation. For all \(x \le y\), let \(\llbracket x, y \rrbracket := [x, y] \cap {\mathbb {N}}\). For vectors \(\varvec{x} = (x_1, \dots , x_d)\) and \(\varvec{y} = (y_1, \dots , y_d)\) in \({\mathbb {N}}^d\), let \(\Vert \varvec{x}\Vert := x_1 \cdots x_d\), \(\llbracket \varvec{x}, \varvec{y} \rrbracket := \llbracket x_1, y_1 \rrbracket \times \cdots \times \llbracket x_d, y_d \rrbracket \), \(\varvec{x}\varvec{y} := (x_1 y_1, \dots , x_d y_d)\), and \(\varvec{x}/\varvec{y} := (x_1 / y_1, \dots , x_d / y_d)\). Let \(\varvec{0}\), respectively \(\varvec{1}\), be the vector of \({\mathbb {N}}^d\) with all components equal to 0, respectively 1. For every \(\varvec{m} = (m_1, \dots , m_d) \in {\mathbb {N}}^d\), write \(\varvec{x} \equiv \varvec{y} \pmod {\varvec{m}}\) if and only if \(x_i \equiv y_i \pmod {m_i}\) for each \(i \in \llbracket 1, d \rrbracket \), and write instead \(\varvec{x} \not \equiv \varvec{y} \pmod {\varvec{m}}\) if and only if \(x_i \not \equiv y_i \pmod {m}\) for at least one \(i \in \llbracket 1, d \rrbracket \).
Lemma 2.1
Let d be a positive integer and let \(\varvec{c}_1, \dots , \varvec{c}_k, \varvec{d} \in {\mathbb {N}}^d\) be vectors such that \(\varvec{c}_1 \cdots \varvec{c}_k \equiv \varvec{0} \pmod {\varvec{d}}\) and \(\varvec{d} \equiv \varvec{0} \pmod {\varvec{c}_i}\) for each \(i \in \llbracket 1, k \rrbracket \). Then the set \({\mathcal {X}}\) of all \(\varvec{x} \in \llbracket \varvec{1}, \varvec{d} \rrbracket \) such that \(\varvec{x} \not \equiv \varvec{0} \pmod {\varvec{c}_i}\) for each \(i \in \llbracket 1, k \rrbracket \) satisfies
Proof
See [10, Lemma 2.1]. \(\square \)
For all positive integers \(a_0, \dots , a_k\), let \({\mathcal {Q}}(a_0, \dots , a_k)\) be the set of primes p such that \(p \equiv 1 \pmod {a_0}\) and \(p\not \equiv 1 \pmod {a_i}\) for every \(i \in \llbracket 1, k \rrbracket \).
Theorem 2.2
Let \(a_0,\dots ,a_k\) be positive integers with \(a_0 \mid a_i\) for each \(i \in \llbracket 1, k \rrbracket \). Then the relative density of \({\mathcal {Q}} := {\mathcal {Q}}(a_0, \dots , a_k)\) exists and satisfies
Proof
We generalize the proof of [10, Theorem 1.2], which corresponds to the special case \(a_0 = 1\). In fact, we proceed almost exactly as in the proof of [10, Theorem 1.2]. We decided to include everything (and not just the small variations) for the sake of completeness. Let \(L := \mathop {\textrm{lcm}}\limits (a_0, \dots , a_k) = p_1^{e_1} \cdots p_d^{e_d}\) where \(p_1< \cdots < p_d\) are primes and \(e_1, \dots , e_d\) are positive integers. Also, let \({\mathcal {S}}\) be the set of integers \(n \in [1, L]\) such that: \(\gcd (n, L) = 1\), \(n \equiv 1 \pmod {a_0}\), and \(n \not \equiv 1 \pmod {a_i}\) for every \(i \in \llbracket 1,k \rrbracket \). By Dirichlet’s theorem on primes in arithmetic progressions, we have that
Hence, the relative density of \({\mathcal {Q}}\) exists. Let us give a lower bound on \(\#{\mathcal {S}}\).
First, assume that \(8 \not \mid L\). Let \(g_j\) be a primitive root modulo \(p_j^{e_j}\), for each \(j \in \llbracket 1,d \rrbracket \). Note that \(g_1\) exists when \(p_1 = 2\) since \(e_1 \le 2\). Put \(\varvec{b} := \big (\varphi (p_1^{e_1}), \dots , \varphi (p_d^{e_d})\big )\). By the Chinese remainder theorem, each \(n \in \llbracket 1, \ell \rrbracket \) with \(\gcd (n, L) = 1\) is uniquely determined by a vector \(\varvec{y}(n) = (y_1(n), \dots , y_d(n)) \in \llbracket \varvec{1}, \varvec{b} \rrbracket \) such that \(n \equiv g_j^{y_j(n)} \pmod {p_j^{e_j}}\) for each \(j \in \llbracket 1,d \rrbracket \). Write \(a_i = p_1^{\alpha _{i,1}} \cdots p_d^{\alpha _{i,d}}\), where \(\alpha _{i,1}, \dots ,\alpha _{i,d} \ge 0\) are integers, and define \(\varvec{a}_i := \big (\varphi (p_1^{\alpha _{i,1}}), \dots , \varphi (p_d^{\alpha _{i,d}})\big )\) for each \(i \in \llbracket 0,k \rrbracket \). Also, put \(\varvec{c}_i = \varvec{a}_i / \varvec{a}_0\) for every \(i \in \llbracket 0,k \rrbracket \), \(\varvec{d} := \varvec{b} / \varvec{a}_0\), and let \({\mathcal {X}}\) be defined as in Lemma 2.1. At this point, it follows easily that \(n \in {\mathcal {S}}\) if and only if \(\varvec{y}(n) \equiv \varvec{0} \pmod {\varvec{a}_0}\) and \(\varvec{y}(n) \not \equiv \varvec{0} \pmod {\varvec{a}_i}\) for each \(i \in \llbracket 1, k\rrbracket \). Therefore, the map \(n \mapsto \varvec{y}(n) / \varvec{a}_0\) is a bijection \({\mathcal {S}} \rightarrow {\mathcal {X}}\) and, consequently, \(\#{\mathcal {S}} = \#{\mathcal {X}}\). Since \(\Vert \varvec{d}\Vert = \varphi (L) / \varphi (a_0)\), \(\Vert \varvec{c}_i\Vert = \varphi (a_i) / \varphi (a_0)\), \(\varvec{c}_1\cdots \varvec{c}_k \equiv \varvec{0} \pmod {\varvec{d}}\), and \(\varvec{d} \equiv \varvec{0} \pmod {\varvec{c}_i}\) for each \(i \in \llbracket 1,k \rrbracket \), we can apply Lemma 2.1, which gives a lower bound on \(\#{\mathcal {X}}\), that is, on \(\#{\mathcal {S}}\). Then (3) and the lower bound on \(\#{\mathcal {S}}\) yield (2).
Now let us consider the case in which \(8 \mid L\). This is a bit more involved since there are no primitive roots modulo \(2^e\), for every integer \(e \ge 3\). However, the previous arguments still work by changing \(\varvec{a}_i\) and \(\varvec{b}\) with
and
Then each \(n \in \llbracket 1, \ell \rrbracket \) with \(\gcd (n, L) = 1\) is uniquely determined by a vector \(\varvec{y}(n) = (y_0(n), \dots , y_d(n)) \in \llbracket \varvec{1}, \varvec{b} \rrbracket \) such that \(n \equiv (-1)^{y_0(n)} 5^{y_1(n)} \pmod {2^{e_1}}\) and \(n \equiv g_j^{y_j(n)} \pmod {p_j^{e_j}}\) for each \(j \in \llbracket 2, d \rrbracket \). The rest of the proof proceeds similarly to the previous case. \(\square \)
For all positive integers \(a_0, a_1, \dots \), let \({\mathcal {Q}}(a_0, a_1, \dots ) := \bigcap _{k \,\ge \, 1} {\mathcal {Q}}(a_0, \dots , a_k)\).
Corollary 2.3
If \(a_0,a_1,\dots \) is a sequence of positive integers such that \(a_0 \mid a_i\) for each integer \(i \ge 1\) and the series \(\sum _{i \,\ge \, 1} 1 / \varphi (a_i)\) converges, then the relative density of \({\mathcal {Q}} := {\mathcal {Q}}(a_0, a_1, \dots )\) exists. Moreover, \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {Q}}) = 0\) if and only if there exists an integer \(i \ge 1\) such that \(a_i = a_0\), or \(a_i = 2a_0\) and \(a_0\) is odd. In such a case, we have that \({\mathcal {Q}} \subseteq \{2\}\).
Proof
If there exists an integer \(i \ge 1\) such that \(a_i = a_0\), or \(a_i = 2a_0\) and \(a_0\) is odd, then it follows easily that \({\mathcal {Q}} \subseteq \{2\}\) and, consequently, \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {Q}}) = 0\). Hence, assume that no such integer i exists. In particular, we have that \(\varphi (a_0) < \varphi (a_i)\) for every integer \(i \ge 1\). From Theorem 2.2 we know that, for every integer \(k \ge 1\), the relative density of \({\mathcal {Q}}_k := {\mathcal {Q}}(a_0, \dots , a_k)\) exists and
where the infinite product converges to a positive number since \(\sum _{i \,\ge \, 1} 1 / \varphi (a_i)\) converges and \(\varphi (a_0) / \varphi (a_i) < 1\) for every integer \(i \ge 1\). Furthermore, for each \(\varepsilon > 0\) and for every sufficiently large positive integer \(k = k(\varepsilon )\), we have that
Therefore, the relative density of \({\mathcal {Q}}\) exists and, in fact, \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {Q}}) = r > 0\). \(\square \)
3 Further preliminaries
The next lemma summarizes some basic properties of the Fibonacci numbers and the arithmetic functions \(\ell \) and z.
Lemma 3.1
For all positive integers m, n and all prime numbers p, we have:
-
1.
labelite:basic:fibdiv \(F_m \mid F_n\) whenever \(m \mid n\).
-
2.
\(\gcd (F_m / F_n, F_n) \mid m / n\) whenever \(n\mid m\).
-
3.
\(m \mid F_n\) if and only if \(z(m) \mid n\).
-
4.
\(z(p) \mid p - \left( \displaystyle \frac{p}{5}\right) \) where \(\left( \displaystyle \frac{p}{5}\right) \) is the Legendre symbol.
-
5.
\(m \mid \gcd (n, F_n)\) if and only if \(\ell (m) \mid n\).
-
6.
\(\ell (\mathop {\textrm{lcm}}\limits (m, n)) = \mathop {\textrm{lcm}}\limits (\ell (m), \ell (n))\).
-
7.
\(\ell (p) = z(p) p\) for \(p \ne 5\), and \(\ell (5) = 5\).
-
8.
\(\ell (n) \le 2n^2\).
Proof
Facts (i)–(iv) are well known (for (ii), see [21, Lemma 2]). Facts (v)–(vii) follow easily from (iii) and (iv) and the definition of \(\ell \) (cf. [18, Lemma 2.1]). Finally, fact (viii) follows easily from the well-known inequality \(z(n) \le 2 n\) (see, e.g., [15]). \(\square \)
Now we state a result to establish if \({\mathcal {A}}_k \ne \varnothing \) and \(\varvec{d}({\mathcal {A}}_k) > 0\).
Lemma 3.2
\({\mathcal {A}}_k \ne \varnothing \) if and only if \(\varvec{d}({\mathcal {A}}_k) > 0\) if and only if \(\gcd \!\big (\ell (k),F_{\ell (k)}\big )=k\), for all integers \(k \ge 1\).
Proof
See [18, Theorem 1.3]. \(\square \)
Lemma 3.3
Let k and n be positive integers. Suppose that \({\mathcal {A}}_k \ne \varnothing \). Then \(n \in {\mathcal {A}}_k\) if and only if \(\ell (k) \mid n\) and \(m \not \mid n\) for every
Proof
See [18, Lemma 3.1]. \(\square \)
We need some upper bounds for series involving \(\ell (n)\).
Lemma 3.4
We have
for all \(\delta \in \big (0, 1/\!\sqrt{6}\;\!\big )\) and \(y \gg _\delta 1\).
Proof
See [13, Proposition 1.4]. \(\square \)
Lemma 3.5
We have
for all \(\delta \in \big (0, 1/\!\sqrt{6}\;\!\big )\) and \(y \gg _\delta 1\).
Proof
From Lemma 3.4 it follows that
for all \(t \gg _\delta 1\). By partial summation, we obtain that
Then, since \(\varphi (n)\gg n/\!\log {\log {n}}\) (see, e.g., [22, Chapter I.5, Theorem 4]) and \(\ell (n)\le 2n^2\) (Lemma 3.1(viii)) for all positive integers n, we have that
The claim follows. \(\square \)
For every \(x > 0\) and for all integers a and b, let \(\pi (x;b,a)\) be the number of primes \(p \le x\) such that \(p \equiv a \pmod b\), and put also
We need the following bounds for \(\Delta (x;b,a)\).
Theorem 3.6
(Siegel–Walfisz) For every \(A > 0\), we have,
for all \(x \gg _A 1\) and for all relatively prime positive integers a, b with \(b \le (\log x)^A\).
Proof
See [7, Corollary 5.29]. \(\square \)
Lemma 3.7
Let \(\varepsilon > 0\). Then we have that
for all \(x \ge 2\) and for all relatively prime positive integers a, b with \(b \le x^{1-\varepsilon }\).
Proof
From the Brun–Titchmarsh theorem [22, Theorem 9] we know that
for all \(b < x\). Hence, the condition \(b \le x^{1-\varepsilon }\) and the upper bound \(\pi (x) \ll x / \log x\) yield that
as desired. \(\square \)
4 Proof of Theorem 1.1
Let k be a positive integer. If \({\mathcal {P}}_k = \varnothing \) then, obviously, the relative density of \({\mathcal {P}}_k\) exists and is equal to zero. Hence, suppose that \({\mathcal {P}}_k \ne \varnothing \). In particular, \({\mathcal {A}}_k \ne \varnothing \), since \(p - 1 \in {\mathcal {A}}_k\) for every \(p \in {\mathcal {P}}_k\). Therefore, by Lemma 3.2, we have that \(\gcd \!\big (\ell (k), F_{\ell (k)}\big ) = k\). Recall the definition of \({\mathcal {Q}}(a_0, a_1, \dots )\) given before Corollary 2.3. Define the sequence \({\mathcal {M}}_k = m_0, m_1, \dots \) where \(m_0< m_1 < \dots \) are all the elements of
Then, from Lemma 3.3 and the definition of \({\mathcal {Q}}({\mathcal {M}}_k)\), it follows that \({\mathcal {P}}_k = {\mathcal {Q}}({\mathcal {M}}_k)\). Furthermore, by Lemma 3.5, we have that
Hence, thanks to Corollary 2.3, we get that the relative density of \({\mathcal {P}}_k\) exists and, in particular, \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {P}}_k) = 0\) if and only if \({\mathcal {P}}_k \subseteq \{2\}\) if and only if there exists an integer \(i \ge 1\) such that \(m_i = m_0\), or \(m_i = 2m_0\) and \(m_0\) is odd. The first case is impossible, since the sequence \({\mathcal {M}}_k\) is increasing. The second case is equivalent to \(2 \not \mid \ell (k)\) and either \(p\, \ell (k) = 2\,\ell (k)\), for some prime number p with \(p \mid k\), or \(\ell (pk) = 2\,\ell (k)\), for some prime number p with \(p \not \mid k\). In turn, since \(k \mid \ell (k)\), this is equivalent to \(2 \not \mid \ell (k)\) and \(\ell (pk) = 2\,\ell (k)\) for some prime number p with \(p \not \mid k\). The proof is complete.
Remark 4.1
We remark that the convergence of the series
admits a simpler proof than invoking Lemma 3.5 which we highlight below. Note that \(\ell (p) \gg p\,z(p) \gg p \log p\) due to Lemma 3.1(vii). Thus, we have that
since \(\varphi (n)\gg n/\!\log {\log {n}}\) and \(\ell (n)\le 2n^2\) for all positive integers n, and the convergence of last sum is standard .
5 Proof of Theorem 1.2
For each positive integer k, let \({\mathcal {R}}_k\) be the set of prime numbers p such that:
-
(i)
\(k \mid \gcd (p-1, F_{p-1})\);
-
(ii)
if \(q \mid \gcd (p-1, F_{p-1})\) for some prime number q, then \(q \mid k\).
The essential part of the proof of Theorem 1.2 is the following formula for the relative density of \({\mathcal {R}}_k\).
Lemma 5.1
For all positive integers k, the relative density of \({\mathcal {R}}_k\) exists and
where the series is absolutely convergent.
Proof
For every prime p and for every positive integer d, let us define
Note that \(\varrho \) is multiplicative in its second argument, that is,
for all primes p and for all coprime positive integers d and e.
From Lemma 3.1(v), it follows easily that \(p \in {\mathcal {R}}_k\) if and only if \(p\equiv 1\pmod {\ell (k)}\) and \(\varrho (p, q) = 0\) for all prime numbers q dividing \(p-1\) but not dividing k. Therefore,
for all \(x > 0\). Furthermore, by Lemma 3.1(iii), given a positive integer d that is relatively prime with k, we have that \(\varrho (p, d) = 1\) and \(\mathop {\textrm{lcm}}\limits (d,\ell (k)) \mid p-1\) if and only if \(\mathop {\textrm{lcm}}\limits (z(d),d, \ell (k)) \mid p-1\), which in turn is equivalent to \(p-1\) being divisible by
where we used Lemma 3.1(vi) and the fact that d and k are relatively prime. Hence, we get that
for all \(x > 0\). Therefore, from (5) and (6), it follows that
for all \(x > 0\). Pick any \(A > 2\). Also, set \(y := x^{1/4} / \big (\!\sqrt{2} k\big )\) and \(z := (\log x)^{A/2} / \big (\!\sqrt{2} k\big )\). Then we have that
for all \(x > 0\), where, by Lemma 3.5, the infinite series converges absolutely, while
and
It remains only to prove that \(E_1(x)\), \(E_2(x)\), \(E_3(x)\), \(E_4(x)\) go to zero as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \). From Lemma 3.5 it follows that
as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \). Note that, thanks to Lemma 3.1(viii), if \(d \le z\) then \(\ell (dk) \le (\log x)^A\). Hence, from Theorem 3.6, we get that
as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \). Observe that due to Lemma 3.1(viii), if \(d \le y\) then \(\ell (dk) \le x^{1/2}\). Hence, applying Lemma 3.7 and Lemma 3.5, we get that
as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \). Finally, using the trivial bound \(\pi (x;b,1)\le x/b\) and Lemma 3.5, we get that
as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \). The proof is complete. \(\square \)
By the definition of \({\mathcal {R}}_k\) and by the inclusion-exclusion principle, it follows easily that
for all \(x > 0\). Therefore, by Lemma 5.1, we get that
since every squarefree integer f can be written uniquely as \(f=de,\) where d and e are squarefree integers such that \(d\mid k\) and \(\gcd (e,k)=1\). The rearrangement of series in (7) is justified by the absolute convergence of the series of Lemma 5.1. The proof is complete.
6 Proof of the lower bound in (1) and Proposition 1.4
Recall that \({\mathcal {K}}\) is defined as the set of positive integers k such that \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {P}}_k) > 0\). We need the following lemma.
Lemma 6.1
Let k be a positive integer such that \(10 \mid k\) and \(\varvec{r}({\mathcal {P}}_k) > 0\), and let \(p \in {\mathcal {P}}_k\). Then we have that \(kp \in {\mathcal {K}}\).
Proof
Since \(p \in {\mathcal {P}}_k\), we have that \(\gcd (p - 1, F_{p - 1}) = k\). Furthermore, since \(5 \mid k\), we have that \(p \equiv 1 \pmod 5\), and so \(z(p)\mid p-1\) and \(p \mid F_{p(p-1)}\) due to Lemma 3.1(iv) and (iii) . In particular, \(\gcd (p, F_{p(p-1)}) = p\). For the sake of brevity, put \(g := \gcd (p - 1, F_{p(p-1)})\). We shall proved that \(g = k\). First, in light of Lemma 3.1(i), we have that \(k \mid g\). Suppose that q is a prime factor of g/k. Then \(q \ne p\) and \(q \mid F_{p(p-1)} / F_{p-1}\). Furthermore, by Lemma 3.1(iii), we have that \(z(q) \mid p(p-1)\). If \(p \mid z(q)\) then, by Lemma 3.1(iv), \(p \mid q - 1\), which is impossible since \(q \le p - 1\). Thus \(p \not \mid z(q)\) and so \(z(q)\mid p-1\). In particular, by Lemma 3.1(iii), we get that \(q \mid F_{p-1}\). Hence, Lemma 3.1(ii), yields that \(q = p\), which is impossible. Therefore, we have that \(g = k\). Consequently, we get that
Thus \({\mathcal {A}}_{kp} \ne \varnothing \) and, by Lemma 3.2, we have that \(\gcd \!\big (\ell (kp),F_{\ell (kp)}\big )=kp\). Also, since \(2 \mid k\), we have that \(2 \mid \ell (kp)\). Hence, from Theorem 1.1 it follows that \(kp \in {\mathcal {K}}\), as desired. \(\square \)
Let us prove the lower bound of Proposition 1.4. Note that \(\ell (10)=30\) and \(\gcd (\ell (10),F_{\ell (10)})=10\) so that, by Theorem 1.1, we have that \({\textbf{r}}({\mathcal {P}}_{10})>0\). Hence, applying Lemma 6.1 with \(k = 10\), we get that
which proves the lower bound.
If \(k \in {\mathcal {K}}\) then, by Theorem 1.1, we have that \(\gcd \!\big (\ell (k),F_{\ell (k)}\big ) = k\). Hence, from [11, Lemma 2.2(iii)], it follows that k belongs to \({\mathcal {A}}\). Therefore \({\mathcal {K}} \subseteq {\mathcal {A}}\). Consequently, on the one hand, by (8), we get that
for all \(x \ge 2\), which is the lower bound of (1). On the other hand, by Theorem 1.3, we get that
as \(x \rightarrow +\infty \), which is the upper bound of Proposition 1.4. The proofs are complete.
Data availibility
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
References
AlbaGonzález, J.J., Luca, F., Pomerance, C., Shparlinski, I.E.: On numbers \(n\) dividing the \(n\)th term of a linear recurrence. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. (2) 55(2), 271–289 (2012)
André-Jeannin, R.: Divisibility of generalized Fibonacci and Lucas numbers by their subscripts. Fibonacci Quart. 29(4), 364–366 (1991)
Chen, A.S., Gassert, T.A., Stange, K.E.: Index divisibility in dynamical sequences and cyclic orbits modulo \(p\). N. Y. J. Math. 23, 1045–1063 (2017)
Cubre, P., Rouse, J.: Divisibility properties of the Fibonacci entry point. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 142(11), 3771–3785 (2014)
Gassert, T.A., Urbanski, M.T.: Index divisibility in the orbit of 0 for integral polynomials. Integers 16, 15 (2020)
Gottschlich, A.: On positive integers \(n\) dividing the \(n\)th term of an elliptic divisibility sequence. N. Y. J. Math. 18, 409–420 (2012)
Iwaniec, H., Kowalski, E.: Analytic Number Theory, American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications, vol. 53. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (2004)
Jha, A.: On terms in a dynamical divisibility sequence having a fixed G.C.D. with their index. arXiv:2105.06190
Kim, S.: The density of the terms in an elliptic divisibility sequence having a fixed G.C.D. with their indices. J. Number Theory 207, 22–41 (2020)
Leonetti, P., Sanna, C.: A note on primes in certain residue classes. Int. J. Number Theory 14(8), 2219–2223 (2018)
Leonetti, P., Sanna, C.: On the greatest common divisor of \(n\) and the \(n\)th Fibonacci number. Rocky Mt. J. Math. 48(4), 1191–1199 (2018)
Luca, F., Tron, E.: The distribution of self-Fibonacci divisors, Advances in the theory of numbers, Fields Inst. Commun., vol. 77, Fields Inst. Res. Math. Sci., Toronto, ON, (2015), pp. 149–158
Mastrostefano, D.: An upper bound for the moments of a GCD related to Lucas sequences. Rocky Mt. J. Math. 49(3), 887–902 (2019)
Mastrostefano, D., Sanna, C.: On numbers \(n\) with polynomial image coprime with the \(n\)th term of a linear recurrence. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 99(1), 23–33 (2019)
Sallé, H.J.A.: A maximum value for the rank of apparition of integers in recursive sequences. Fibonacci Quart. 13, 159–161 (1975)
Sanna, C.: On numbers \(n\) dividing the \(n\)th term of a Lucas sequence. Int. J. Number Theory 13(3), 725–734 (2017)
Sanna, C.: On numbers \(n\) relatively prime to the \(n\)th term of a linear recurrence. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 42(2), 827–833 (2019)
Sanna, C., Tron, E.: The density of numbers \(n\) having a prescribed G.C.D. with the \(n\)th Fibonacci number. Indag. Math. (N.S.) 29(3), 972–980 (2018)
Silverman, J.H., Stange, K.E.: Terms in elliptic divisibility sequences divisible by their indices. Acta Arith. 146(4), 355–378 (2011)
Somer, L.: Divisibility of terms in Lucas sequences by their subscripts. Appl. Fibonacci Numbers 5, 515–525 (1992)
Stewart, C.L.: On divisors of Fermat, Fibonacci, Lucas, and Lehmer numbers. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 35(3), 425–447 (1977)
Tenenbaum, G.: Introduction to analytic and probabilistic number theory, third ed., Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 163, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2015, Translated from the 2008 French edition by Patrick D. F. Ion
Tron, E.: The greatest common divisor of linear recurrences. Rend. Semin. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino 78(1), 103–124 (2020)
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the anonymous referee for carefully reading the paper and for providing useful suggestions.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Politecnico di Torino within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
C. Sanna is a member of GNSAGA of INdAM and of CrypTO, the group of Cryptography and Number Theory of Politecnico di Torino.
Missing Open Access funding information has been added in the Funding Note.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Jha, A., Sanna, C. Greatest common divisors of shifted primes and Fibonacci numbers. Res. number theory 8, 65 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40993-022-00365-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40993-022-00365-2