arxiv: v1 [math.nt] 31 Aug 2011

Transcription

1 A CONVESE TO HALÁSZ S THEOEM MAKSYM ADZIWI L L arxiv: v [math.nt] 3 Aug 20 Abstract. We show that the distribution of large values of an additive function on the integers, and the distribution of values of the additive function on the rimes are related to each other via a Levy Process. As a consequence we obtain a converse to an old theorem of Halasz [4]. Halasz roved that if f is an strongly additive function with f) {0,}, then f is Poisson distributed on the integers. We rove, conversely, that if f is Poisson distributed on the integers then for most rimes, f) = o) or f) = +o).. Introduction. Let g be an strongly additive function that is, gmn) = gm)+gn) for m,n) = and g k ) = g)). According to a model due to Mark Kac [6] the distribution of the gn) s with n x and x large) is redicted by the random variable x g)x where the X s are indeendent Bernoulli random variables with PX = ) = PX = 0) = According to this model most gn) s cluster around the mean µg;x) of x g)x and within a constant multile of Bg; x). Here, µg;x) := x g) and Bg;x) 2 := x g) 2 In this aer a follow u to [9]) we investigate the inter-relation between the distribution of an additive function g on the integers, i.e, { ) x # n x : gn) µg;x) } Bg; x) in the range Bg;x) ε, and the distribution of the additive function g on the rimes: g) 2 2) lim x Bg;x) 2 x g) t for fixed t. Previously this question was considered only in the context of limit theorems that is, with = O) in )) and in that situation the behavior of ) is controlled by the distribution of g)/bg;x) for x see [2],. 2). We will rove, roughly seaking, that in the range Bg;x) ε, ) behaves as a sum of Bf;x) 2 indeendent and identically distributed random variables if and only if 2) converges to a distribution function for almost all t. Since Bf;x) 2 might not be an integer 200 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: N64, Secondary: N60, K65, 60F0. The author is artially suorted by a NSEC PGS-D award.

2 2 MAKSYM ADZIWI L L there is some care necessary in defining what it means to have Bf;x) 2 random variables. For this reason we first illustrate our results in the secial case of the Poisson distribution. Following the work of Selberg [] and Sathe [0] in the case g) = ) and Halasz [4] in the general case g) {0,}), it is known that if g is a strongly additive function with g) {0,} and Bg;x), then 3) x # { n x : gn) µg;x) Bg; x) uniformly in obg;x)), where, Poissonλ, ) := } Poisson Bg;x) 2 ; ) v λ+ λ e λ λv v! denotes the tail of a Poisson distribution with arameter λ. It is not difficult to see that the condition g) {0,} is not strictly necessary for the validity of 3) for examle one could let g2) = 0 and 3) would still hold). Indeed, a minor variation on Halasz s theorem [4] shows that to guarantee 3) it is enough to have 0 g) O), Bg;x) and 4) Bg;x) 2 x g) t g) 2 = δ t)+o as x, uniformly in t, and where 0 if t < α 5) δ α t) := if t = α 2 if t > α Bg;x) 2 elation 4) roughly asserts that for most rimes, g) = o) or g) = +o). It turns out that a condition such as 4) erhas with a weaker error term) is not only sufficient for 3) but also necessary. This is a secial case of our main result Theorem 2). Theorem. Let g be a strongly additive function. If 3) holds uniformly in Bg;x) ε, then, as x, for all t. Bg;x) 2 x g) t g) 2 δ t). Both Theorem and the sufficient condition 4) are secial cases of more general results which we will now state. Our roofs build in a fundamental way on Halasz s aer [4] and its alication to large deviations of additive functions develoed by Halasz unublished, see [2]) and the Lithuanian school for examle [8]). The main tool underneath these large deviations results is Cramer s method [], first transosed into an arithmetic context by Kubilius, in [7]. Desite being more technical our main result Theorem 2 and Theorem 3) has the merit of making clear the inter-relation between the distribution of the additive function on the integers and its distribution on the rimes. This inter-relation by Levy Processes in fact a modified version of that concet) which we now introduce into our discussion. )

3 A CONVESE TO HALÁSZ S THEOEM 3 Definition. Let Ψ be a distribution function. Suose that Ψα) Ψ0) = for some α > 0. We define {Z Ψ u)} u 0 to be a sequence of random variables with distribution determined by E [ e ] ) itz e Ψu) itx itx = ex iu dψx) 0 x 2 for each u 0. Forinteger u N, therandomvariablez Ψ u)canbethoughtoffasasumofuindeendent coies of Z Ψ ). Thus Z Ψ u) is a continuous generalization of the notion of a random walk. Notice also that if Ψt) = δt), then Z Ψ u) is a centered Poisson random variable with arameter u. Theorem is a articular case i.e Ψt) = δ t)) of the following result. Theorem 2. Let g be a strongly additive function with 0 g) O) and Bg;x). If there is a distribution function Ψt) δ 0 t) such that Ψα) Ψ0) = for some α > 0) and such that, 6) x # { n x : gn) µg;x) } P Z Ψ Bg;x) 2 ) Bg;x) ) Bg; x) uniformly in Bg;x) ε, then, 7) lim x Bg;x) 2 at all continuity oints of Ψt). x g) t g) 2 = Ψt) The range Bg;x) ε is otimal for the conclusion of the Theorem. In the range Bg;x) α with α < ) the left-hand side of 6) deends only on the first k +α α moments g) 2+k Bg;x) 2 x and thus cannot imly 7) see [9] for more on this). It is fitting to comlete Theorem 2 with a result showing that each of the laws Z Ψ u) does occur as the law of some additive function and thus 6) is not vacuous for any Ψ). We show this below. Theorem 3. Let g be a strongly additive function with 0 g) O) and Bg;x). If there is a distribution function Ψt) δ 0 t) with Ψα) Ψ0) = for some α > 0) such that 8) uniformly in t, then, x # Bg;x) 2 x g) t g) 2 { n x : gn) µg;x) Bg; x) uniformly in obg;x)). = Ψg;t)+O Bg;x) 2 } P Z Ψ Bg;x) 2 ) Bg;x) ) )

4 4 MAKSYM ADZIWI L L For each Ψt) one can always choose the g) s so that 8) is satisfied. It follows that for each Z Ψ there is an additive function g whose distribution on the integers is described by the rocess {Z Ψ u)} u 0. In articular the assumtion 6) of Theorem 2 is never vacuous. The conclusion of these two theorems can be subsumed as follows: given an additive function g, its distribution on the rimes Ψ and its distribution on the integers F, a related through the following corresondance, {Z Ψ u)} = F Ψt) It would be interesting to elucidate this connection further, and rove theorems that allow for a Ψ that varies with x, say, Ψ x t) := Bg;x) 2 x g) t g) 2 Then the goal would be to describe the resulting distribution Z Ψx Bg;x) 2 ) on the integers in terms of Ψ x t), and vice-versa. The questions aearing in this aer have been also exlored in a different context in my aer [9] 2. Integers to rimes : Proof of Theorem 2 The goal of this section is to rove Theorem 2. Throughout we define D f x; ) by D f x; ) := { x # n x : fn) µf;x) } Bf;x) 2.. Large deviations for D f x; ) and PZ Ψ x) t). We will usually need to adjust some of the results taken from the literature. Our main tool will be Lagrange inversion. Lemma. Let C > 0 be given. Let fz) be analytic in z C. Suose that f z) 0 for all z C and that in z C the function fz) vanishes only at the oint z = 0. Then, the function g defined imlicitly by fgz)) = z is analytic in a neighborhood of 0 and its n-th coefficient a n in the Taylor exansion about 0 is given by a n = 2πi γ ζf ζ) fζ) n+dζ where γ is a circle about 0, contained in ζ C. The function gz) is given by gz) = ζf ζ) 2πi fζ) z dζ and again γ is a circle about 0, contained in ζ C. The desired asymtotic for D f x; ) is contained in Maciulis s aer [8], lemma A). Lemma 2. Let f be an additive function. Suose that 0 f) O) and that Bf;x) or equivalently σf;x) ). Let B 2 = Bf;x) 2. Uniformly in the range oσf;x)) we have D f x; ) ex 3 B k=0 γ λ f x;k +2) k +3 ) /B) k e u2 /2 du 2π

5 A CONVESE TO HALÁSZ S THEOEM 5 where the coefficients λ f x;k) are defined recursively by λ f x;0) = 0,λ f x;) = and ) j λ f x;j) = i! f) i+ λ Bf;x) 2 f x;k )... λ f x;k i ) i=2 x k +...+k i =j Further there is a constant C = Cf) such that λ f x;k) C k for all k,x. Proof. Excet the bound λ f x;k) C k, the totality of the lemma is contained in Maciulis s aer [8], lemma A). Let us rove that λ f x;k) C k for a suitable ositive constant C > 0. To do so, we consider the ower series G f x;z) = j 2 λ f x;j) z j +z Let us look in more detail at the sum over j 2. By making use of the recurrence relation for λ f x;j) we see that the sum in question equals to = ) j i! f) i+ Bf;x) 2 λ f x;k )... λ f x;k i ) z j j 2 i=2 x k +...+k i =j = ) ) i i! f) i+ Bf;x) 2 λ f x;k)z k i 2 x f) = Bf;x) 2 i! f)i G f x;z) i x = Bf;x) 2 x f) i 2 e f)g fx;z) f)g f x;z) ) The above calculation reveals that F f x;g f x;z)) = z where F f x;z) is defined by F f x;z) = z + = Bf;x) 2 Bf;x) 2 x x f) f) e f)z f)z ) e f)z ) Since all the f) are bounded by some M 0, we have F f x;z) = z +OMz 2 ) when z is in a neighborhood of 0, furthermore the imlicit constant in the big O, deends only on M. Therefore F f x;z) for z in the annulus B/2 z B, where B is a sufficiently small constant, deending only on M. Let us also note the derivative d dz F fx;z) = Bf;x) 2 x f) 2 e f)z doesn t vanish and is bounded uniformly in z B for B sufficiently small, deending only on M. Hence by Lagrange inversion the function G f x;z) is for each x analytic in the neighborhood z B of 0, and in addition, its coefficients λ f x;k) are given by λ f x;k) = 2πi ζ =B/2 ζ d/dζ)f f x;ζ) dζ F f x;ζ) k+

6 6 MAKSYM ADZIWI L L However we know that F f x;ζ) andthat d/dζ)g f x;ζ) onthe boundary ζ = B/2 with the imlicit constant deending only on M. Therefore, the integral is bounded by C k, for some C > 0 deending only on M. Hence λ f x;k) C k. From Hwang s aer [5] itself heavily based on the same methods as used by Maciulis [8] we obtain the next lemma. Since Hwang s lemma is not exactly what is stated below, we include the deduction. Lemma 3. Let Ψ be a distribution function. Suose that there is an α > 0 such that Ψα) Ψ0) =. Let B 2 = B 2 x) be some function tending to infinity. Uniformly in the range ob) we have P Z Ψ B 2 ) B ) ex 3 B k=0 ΛΨ;k +2) k +3 ) /B) k e u2 /2 du 2π the coefficients ΛΨ;k) satisfy ΛΨ;0) = 0,ΛΨ;) = and the recurrence relation ΛΨ;j) = 2 l j l! t l dψf;t) k +...+k l =j ΛΨ;k )... ΛΨ;k l ) Furthermore there is a constant C = CΨ) > 0 such that ΛΨ;k) C k for k. Proof. Let uz) = uψ;z) = ezt zt ) t 2 dψt). Note that uz) is entire because Ψt) is suorted on a comact interval. By Hwang s theorem see [5]) P Z Ψ B 2 ) B ) ex B 2 ΛΨ;k +2) k +3 ) /B) k e u2 /2 du 2π uniformlyin obx))withthecoefficients ΛΨ;k)givenbyΛΨ;0) = 0, ΛΨ;) = and for k 0, ΛΨ;k +2) k +3 = k +3 2πi = k +3 γ γ ) u u k 3 z) dz z) z z k+2 zu z) dz u z) k+3 2πi we set m = k + 3, k 0, q m = ΛΨ;k + 2)/k + 3) in equation 7) of [5] and rewrite equation 8) in [5] in terms of Cauchy s formula). Here γ is a small circle around the origin. First let us show that the coefficients ΛΨ;k+2) are bounded by C k for a sufficiently large but fixed) C > 0. Around z = 0 we have u z) = ezt ) t dψt) = z + Oz 2 ). Therefore if we choose the circle γ to have sufficiently small radius then u z) for z on γ. Hence looking at the revious equation, the Cauchy integral defining ΛΨ;k+2)/k+3 is bounded in modulus by C k+3 for some constant C > 0. The bound ΛΨ;k) C k ensues erhas with a larger C than earlier). Our goal now is to show that ΛΨ;k) satisfies the recurrence relation given in the statement of the lemma. Multilying by ξ k+3 and summing

7 over k 0 we obtain = = γ γ A CONVESE TO HALÁSZ S THEOEM 7 ΛΨ;k+2) k +3 zu z) zu z) ξ k+3 k +3 γ ξ k+3 = ) k+3 ξ k +3 dz u z) 2πi ξ u z) 2 ξ 2 u z) 2 log zu z) dz u z) k+3 2πi ξ u z) )) dz 2πi Differentiating with resect to ξ on both sides yields G Ψ ξ) = ) zu ΛΨ;k+2)ξ k+2 z) = u z) ξ zu z) u z) ξzu z) dz u z) 2 2πi By Lagrange inversion this last integral is equal to u ) ξ) 0 ξ where u ) denotes the inverse function to u z). Hence 9) ΛΨ;k)ξ k = u ) ξ) Let us comose this with u ) on both sides and comute the resulting left hand side. First of all we exand u z) in a ower series. This gives u e zt z) = dψt) = t l dψt) z l t l! l Therefore, comosing 9) with u ) yields ) ξ = u ΛΨ;k)ξ k = l = t l dψt) l! l = t l dψt) l! m l m k,...,k l ) l t l dψt) ΛΨ;k)ξ k l! ) ΛΨ;k )... ΛΨ;k l ) ξ k +...+k l k +...+k l =m ΛΨ;k )... ΛΨ;k l ) Thus the first coefficient ΛΨ;) is equal to, as desired, while for the terms m 2 we have t l dψt) ΛΨ;k )... ΛΨ;k l ) = 0 l! l m k +...+k l =m The first term l = is equal to ΛΨ;m). It suffice to move it on the right hand side of the equation, to obtain the desired recurrence relation. Finally we will need one last result from the literature. Namely a weak form of the method of moments. For a roof we refer the reader to Gut s book [3], Note that the next lemma follows from the result in [3] because in our case the random variables are ositive, and bounded, in articular their distribution is determined uniquely by their moments). ) ξ m

8 8 MAKSYM ADZIWI L L Lemma 4. Let Ψ be a distribution function. Suose that there is an a > 0 such that Ψa) Ψ0) =. Let Fx;t) be a sequence of distribution functions, one for each x > 0. If for each k 0, t k dfx;t) t k dψt) Then Fx;t) Ψt) at all continuity oints t of Ψt) Proof of Theorem 2. Proof of Theorem 2. By assumtions D f x; ) PZ Ψ B 2 f;x)) Bf;x)) holds throughout obf;x)). The roof is in three stes. etaining the notation of Lemma 2 and Lemma 3 we first show that λ f k;x) ΛΨ;k) for all k 2 for k = this is trivial). Then, we deduce from there that 0) Bf;x) 2 x f) t f) k+2 t k dψt) Hence by the method of moments ) Bf;x) 2 x f) t f) 2 Ψt) The last ste being the easy one. To rove our first ste we will roceed by induction on k 0. We will rove the stronger claim that λ f x;k +2) = ΛΨ;k+2)+O k B 2 k+)) where we write B = Bf;x) to simlify notation. By Lemma 2 and 3, our assumtion D f x; ) PZ Ψ Bf;x) 2 ) Bf;x)) for obf;x))) reduces to 2) 3 B m 0 λ f x;m+2) m+3 /B) m = 3 B m 0 ΛΨ;m+2) m+3 /B) m +o) validthroughout the range oσf;x)). Let us first establish the basecase λ f x;2) = ΛΨ;2)+OB /2 ). In 2) we choose = B /2. Because of the bounds λ f x;m) C m and ΛΨ;m) C m see lemma 2 and 3) the terms m contribute O). The m = 0 term is B /2. It follows that λ f x;2) = ΛΨ;2)+OB /2 ) and so the base case follows. Let us now suose that for all l < k, k ) λ f x;l+2) = ΛΨ;l+2)+O l B 2 l+)) Note that we can assume in the above equation) that the imlicit constant deends on k, by taking the max of the imlicit constants in O l B 2 l+) ) for l < k. In equation 2) let s choose = B 2 k+). With this choice of the terms that are k + in 2) contribute at most 3 /B ) C /B) k+ k B 2 B 3 2 k+) B k+) 2 k+)

9 A CONVESE TO HALÁSZ S THEOEM 9 on both sides of 2). On the other hand, we see by using the induction hyothesis) that the terms m k on the left and the right hand side of 2) differ by no more that ) 3 B /B) l l+3 λ f x;l+2) ΛΨ;l+2)) l<k )) = O k B 2 B l 2 k+) B 3 2 k+) B 2 l+) l+3 l<k ) = O k B 2 B 3 2 k+) B 2 k+) l+2k l ) l+3 l<k Note that for each integer l < k we have l+2 k l k+. Therefore the above error term is bounded by O k B 2 B 3 2 k B k+)2 k+) ). With these two observations at hand, relation 2) reduces to 3 B /B)k k +3 [λ f x;k +2) ΛΨ;k +2)] = O k B k+) B k+) 2 k+)) +o) where = B 2 k+). Dividing by 3 /B /B) k B k+) B k 2 k+) on both sides, we conclude that λ f x;k + 2) ΛΨ;k + 2) = O k B 2 k+) ) as desired, thus finishing the inductive ste. Now, we will rove that λ f x;k) ΛΨ;k) imlies 3) M f x;l) := Bf;x) 2 x f) l+2 t l dψt) for each fixed l 0. This follows almost immediately from the recurrence relation for λ f x;k) and ΛΨ;k). Indeed let us rove 3) by induction on k 0. The base case k = 0 is obvious, for the left hand side and right hand side of 3) are both equal to. Let us now suose that 3) holds for all l < k. We will rove that convergence also holds for l = k. By definition of λ f x;k +) we have 4) λ f x;k +) = k j=2 M f x;j ) j! l +...+l j =k+ λ f x;l )...λ f x;l j ) M fx;k) k +)! we single out j = k+ on the right hand side). By induction hyothesis M f x;j ) t j dψt) as x, for j k. Further as we ve shown earlier λ f x;i) ΛΨ;i) for all i 0. Therefore the whole double sum on the right hand side of 4) tends to k j=2 j! t j dψt) l +...+l j =k+ ΛΨ;l )... ΛΨ;l j ) which, by definition of ΛΨ;k) is equal to ΛΨ;k + ) + /k + )! tk dψt). But also λ f x;k +) ΛΨ;k + ) because λ f x;i) ΛΨ;i) for all i 0. Thus the left hand side of 4) tends to ΛΨ;k +) while the double sum on the right hand side of 4) tends to ΛΨ;k +)+/k+)! tk dψt). Therefore equation 4) transforms into ΛΨ;k +) = ΛΨ;k +)+ k +)! t k dψt) M fx;k) k +)! +o x )

10 0 MAKSYM ADZIWI L L and M f x;k) tk dψt) x ) follows. This establishes the induction ste and thus 3) for all fixed l 0. Now we use the method of moments to rove that Fx;t) := B 2 f;x) x f) t f) 2 Ψt) x holds at all continuity oints t of Ψt). Let us note that, the k-th moment of the distribution function Fx;t), is given by M f x;k), and as we ve just shown this converges to the the k-th moment of Ψt). That is t k dfx;t) = f) k+2 B 2 f;x) x t k dψt) Since Ψa) Ψ0) = for some a > 0, the distribution function Ψ satisfies the assumtion of Lemma 4, hence, by Lemma 4 the method of moments) we have Fx;t) Ψt) at all continuity oints t of Ψ as desired. 3. Primes to integers: Proof of Theorem 3 We kee the same notation as in the revious section. Namely we recall that, B 2 f;x) := f) 2 and D f x; ) := { x # n x : fn) µf;x) } Bf;x) x We first need to modify a little some of the known large deviations results for D f x; ) and PZ Ψ B 2 f;x)) Bf;x)). 3.. Large deviations for D f x; ) and PZ Ψ x) t) revisited. First we require the result of Maciulis [8], theorem) in a saddle-oint version. Lemma 5. Let g be a stronglyadditive function such that0 g) O)and Bg;x). We have uniformly in obg;x)), e ηg) ηg) D g x; ) ex η ) g)e ηg) ) e 2 /2 e t2 /2 dt x x 2π where η = η g x; ) is defined as the unique ositive solution of the equation x g)e ηg) = µg;x)+ Bg;x) Furthermore η g x; ) = /Bg;x)+O 2 /Bg;x) 2 ). Proof. Only the last assertion needs to be roved, because it is not stated exlicitly in Maciulius s aer. Fortunately enough, it s a triviality. Indeed, writing η = η g x; ), we find that 0 η g x; ) g) 2 g)e ηg) ) = Bg;x) x x

11 A CONVESE TO HALÁSZ S THEOEM Dividing by B 2 g;x) on both sides 0 η g x; ) /Bg;x) follows. Now exanding e ηg) = ηg)+oη 2 g) 2 ) and noting that Oη 2 g) 2 ) = Oη 2 g)) because g) = O), we find that Bg;x) = x g)e ηg) ) = η ) g) 2 +O η 2 g) 2 x x Again dividing by B 2 g;x) on both sides, and using the bound η = O /Bg;x)) the claim follows. Adating Hwang s [5] result we rove the following. Lemma 6. Let Ψ be a distribution function. Suose that there is an α > 0 such that Ψα) Ψ0) =. Let B 2 = B 2 x) be some function tending to infinity. Then, uniformly in obx)) the quantity PZ Ψ B 2 ) B) is asymtotic to ex B 2 e ρu ρu u 2 dψu) B 2 ρ e ρu dψu) u ) e t2 /2 dt 2π e 2 /2 where ρ = ρ Ψ Bx); ) is defined imlicitly, as the unique ositive solution to B 2 e ρu x) dψu) = Bx) u Proof. We kee the same notation as in lemma 3. While roving lemma 3 we established the following useful relationshi see 9)) ΛΨ;k+2)ξ k+2 = u ) e zt zt ξ) ξ where uz) = dψt) t 2 Here u ) denotes the inverse function of u. Integrating the above gives ΛΨ;k+2) ξ k+3 = ξ2 k ξ u ) ξ) uu ) ξ)) Now choose ξ = /B, then by definition ρ = ρ Ψ Bx); ) = u ) ξ). Thus the above formula becomes ΛΨ;k+2) /B) k+3 = /B)2 + k +3 2 B ρ e ρt ρt dψt) t 2 Also, note that by definition /B = eρt )/t dψt). Using the above formula in which we relace /B) ρ by ρ eρt )/t dψt)) and lemma 3 ) PZ Ψ B 2 ) B) ex B 2 ΛΨ;k +2) /B) k+3 e u2 /2 du k +3 2π = ex B 2 e ρt ) ρt dψt) B 2 e ρt /2 ρ dψt) e 2 e u2 /2 du t 2 t 2π This is the claim. Before we rove Theorem 3, we need to show that the arameters η g x; ) and ρ Ψ Bf;x); ) as defined resectively in Lemma 5 and Lemma 6) are close when the distribution of the g) s resembles Ψt). The closeness assertion is made recise in the next lemma.

12 2 MAKSYM ADZIWI L L Lemma 7. Let Ψ ) be a distribution function. Let f be a ositive strongly additive function. Suose that 0 f) O) for all rimes. Let K f x;t) := B 2 f;x) x f) t If K f x;t) Ψt) /B 2 f;x) uniformly in t, then f) 2 ρ Ψ Bf;x); ) η f x; ) = o/b 2 f;x)) uniformly in obf;x)). The symbols ρ Ψ Bx); ) and η f x; ) are defined in lemma 6 and lemma 5 resectively. Proof. Let η = η f x; ). ecall that by lemma 5, η = o) in the range obf;x)). This will justify the numerous Taylor exansions involving the arameter η. With K f x;t) defined as in the statement of the lemma, we have 5) x f)e ηf) µf;x) = f)e ηf) ) x = B 2 e ηt f;x) dk f x;t) t Let M > 0 be a real number such that 0 f) M for all. Since the f) are bounded, for each x > 0 the distribution function K f x;t) is suorted on [0;M]. Furthermore since K f x;t) Ψt) the distribution function Ψt) is suorted on exactly the same interval. From these considerations, it follows that e ηt M e ηt dk f x;t) = dk f x;t) 6) = M 0 t e ηt dψt) + t M 0 0 t ) [ e ηt ηt e ηt Kf x;t) Ψt) t 2 By a simle Taylor exansion e ηt ηt e ηt = Oη 2 t 2 ). Therefore the integral on the right hand side is bounded by Oη 2 /B 2 f;x)). We conclude from 5) and 6) that f)e ηf) 7) µf;x) = B 2 e ηt f;x) dψt)+o η 2) t x By definition of ρ Ψ and η f, 8) B 2 e ρψb; )t f;x) dψt) = Bf;x) = f)e η fx; )f) µf;x) t x From 7) and 8) it follows that 9) B 2 e ρψb; )t e η fx; )t f;x) dψt) = O ηf 2 t x; )) Since Ψt) is suorted on [0;M] we can restrict the above integral to [0;M]. By lemma 5, we have η f x; ) /Bf;x) = o) in the range obf;x)). Also 0 ρ Ψ x; ) ] dt

13 A CONVESE TO HALÁSZ S THEOEM 3 [0;M] eρ Ψx; )t )/t dψt) = /Bf;x) = o) for in the same range. Write ρ := ρ Ψ B; ) and η := η f x; ). For 0 t M, we have /t) e ρt e ηt) = /t)e ρt e η ρ)t ) = e ρt η ρ)+oη ρ) 2 ) η ρ because ρ = o), η = o). Inserting thisestimate into 9)we get η ρ = Oη 2 /B 2 f;x)) = o/b 2 f;x)) since η 2 = o). The lemma is roved Proof of Theorem 3. Proof of Theorem 3. Let notation be as in Lemma 6. Let η = η f x; ) be the arameter from lemma 5. Proceeding as in the roof of the revious lemma, we get e ηf) ηf) = B 2 e ηu ηu 20) f;x) dψu)+o) u 2 2) x η x f) e ηf) ) = B 2 f;x)η e ηu dψu)+o) u throughout the range obf;x)). Let ρ := ρ Ψ Bf;x); ) denote the arameter from Lemma 6. The functions on the right of 0.6) and 0.7) are analytic. Therefore, by lemma 7, B 2 e ηu ηu f;x) dψu) = B 2 e ρu ρu 22) f;x) dψu)+o) 23) B 2 f;x)η u 2 e ηu dψu) = B 2 f;x)ρ u u 2 e ρu dψu)+o) u uniformly in obf;x)). On combining 20) with 22) and 2) with 23) we obtain e ηf) ηf) η f)e ηf) ) x x = B 2 e ρu ρu f;x) dψu) B 2 f;x)ρ u 2 By lemma 5, lemma 6 and the above equation, we get D f x; ) P Z Ψ B 2 f;x) ) Bf;x) ) e ρu dψu)+o) u uniformly in obf;x)) as desired. Acknowledgements. This is art of author s undergraduate thesis, written under the direction of Andrew Granville. The author would like to thank first and foremost Andrew Granville. There is too much to thank for, so it is simler to note that this roject would not surface without his constant suort. Also, the author would like to thank Philie Sosoe for roof-reading a substantial art of the old manuscrit of this aer.

14 4 MAKSYM ADZIWI L L eferences [] H. Cramer. Sur un nouveau théoréme-limite de la théorie des robabilités. Actualités Scientifiques et Industrielles, 736:5 23, 938. [2] P. D. T. A. Elliott. Probabilistic Number Theory. Vol II. Central limit theorems. Sringer-Verlag, 980. [3] A. Gut. Probability : A graduate course. Sringer-Verlag, [4] G. Halász. On the distribution of additive and the mean-values of multilicative arithmetic functions. Studia. Sci. Math. Hungarica., 6:2 233, 97. [5] H.-K. Hwang. Large deviations for combinatorial distributions. i. central limit theorems. Ann. Al. Probab., 6 no. :297 39, 996. [6] M. Kac. Statistical Indeendance in Probability, Analysis, and Number theory. Mathematical Association of America, 959. [7] J. Kubilius. Probabilistic methods in the theory of numbers [8] A. Maciulis. A lemma on large deviations. Lithuanian. Mat. Journal, 23 no. :70 78, 983. [9] M. adziwi l l. On a structure theorem in robabilistic number theory. re-rint, 20. [0] L. G. Sathe. On a roblem of hardy on the distribution of integers having a given number of rime factors. ii. J. Indian Math. Soc. N.S.), 7:83 4, 953. [] A. Selberg. Note on a aer by l. g. sathe. J. Indian Math. Soc. N.S.), 8:83 87, 954. Deartment of Mathematics, Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Bldg. 380, Stanford, CA address: maksym@stanford.edu