Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Variations of Kurepa's left factorial hypothesis

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1312.7037 v2 pith:STJXK6FK submitted 2013-12-26 math.NT

classification math.NT
keywords hypothesiskurepaintegerinvolvingderangementnumbersdeterminantdivisibility
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

Kurepa's hypothesis asserts that for each integer $n\ge 2$ the greatest common divisor of $!n:=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}k!$ and $n!$ is $2$. Motivated by an equivalent formulation of this hypothesis involving derangement numbers, here we give a formulation of Kurepa's hypothesis in terms of divisibility of any Kurepa's determinant $K_p$ of order $p-4$ by a prime $p\ge 7$. In the previous version of this article we have proposed the strong Kurepa's hypothesis involving a general Kurepa's determinant $K_n$ with any integer $n\ge 7$. We prove the ``even part'' of this hypothesis which can be considered as a generalization of Kurepa's hypothesis. However, by using a congruence for $K_n$ involving the derangement number $S_{n-1}$ with an odd integer $n\ge 9$, we find that the integer $11563=31\times 373$ is a counterexample to the ``odd composite part'' of strong Kurepa's hypothesis. We also present some remarks, divisibility properties and computational results closely related to the questions on Kurepa's hypothesis involving derangement numbers and Bell numbers.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Partition Functions and Kurepa Decomposition I: Algebraic computation and some physical Applications

    math.CO 2025-09 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    The alleged proof of gcd(F_n, (n+1)!)=2 collapses because F_n is simply the Kurepa factorial and the key lemma is the conjecture itself.

Pith tools