Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 30 references

Piercing Gilbreath's Conjecture: From Deep Number Theory Insights to Fintech and Cybersecurity

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that Gilbreath's 1878 conjecture on primes follows from a single quantitative balance condition — a long '0-2 cycle' in the difference triangle — and gives a partial proof conditioned on that pattern.

desk verdict A mix of genuine computational observations and an unsupported claim to have a path to proving Gilbreath's conjecture; the proof path rests on a conjecture as strong as the target. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.04166 v3 pith:OTHZDOEW submitted 2026-07-05 cs.CR cs.AI

Vincent Granville This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CRcs.AI MSC 11A4111N05
keywords Gilbreath'sconjectureprimegaps0-2cycleabsolutedifferencetriangleforbiddenconstellationsreversesievingmagicprimessequencecorridors
topics The Twin Prime Conjecture
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper aims to settle Gilbreath's conjecture, the 1878 claim that repeatedly taking absolute differences of consecutive primes always starts the next row with 1. The contribution is a reduction: success stops or continues being decided by the rightmost column of the difference triangle, and in particular by the length of the final run of 0s and 2s, called the 0-2 cycle. The author proves that if the record prime gap up to position n is below n^0.525 and the 0-2 cycle contains more than n^β entries equal to 2 for any β>0.525, then every new prime preserves success. The missing piece is Conjecture 5.1, which asserts that the primes meet this condition (β=0.99 for n>2535); the paper verifies it empirically to 10^4 primes and provides related proved results for sifted sequences and 'magic' twin primes. A sympathetic reading: this is a precise route to Gilbreath, with the hard open part isolated as a concrete quantitative claim about prime gaps.

What carries the argument

The right diagonal δ(q_n) of the absolute-difference triangle: the column of n values obtained by repeatedly taking |a_{k-1}-a_k| down the right edge. The load-bearing quantity is the 0-2 cycle, the final stretch of δ(q_n) just above the bottom containing only 0 and 2; ν2(q_{n-1}) counts the 2s in it. Lemma 5.4 shows the next term succeeds exactly when the incoming value v_n does not exceed 2ν2+2, converting the whole conjecture into a race between record gaps and the length of the 0-2 cycle. The paper also uses sieved sequences S_κ (integers coprime to the first κ primes) to prove success for infinite sequences containing all primes blended with composites, as evidence that the mechanism is

What would settle it

Compute the right diagonal δ(p_n) at a prime index n>2535 and count ν2, the twos in the 0-2 cycle, and the length ω_n of the section before it. If ν2 ≤ n^0.99 or ω_n ≥ √n log n, Conjecture 5.1(4) is false and the paper's reduction to Gilbreath no longer applies. Because the paper only tested to 10^4, running the same O(n) check at n=10^6 or 10^7 would either confirm or refute the key premise.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that Gilbreath's conjecture is equivalent in effect to a balance property of the right diagonal of the absolute-difference triangle. Once the triangle's rightmost column reaches a long enough stretch of 0s and 2s, any subsequent term that is not too large keeps the bottom cell equal to 1. Theorem 5.5 makes this quantitative: with g*_n < n^α and ν2(q_{n−1}) > n^β and β>α, a valid successful sequence cannot fail at the next step. Applying the known prime-gap exponent α=0.525 (Baker 2001) and conjecturing β=0.99 for the primes, the author obtains what he describes as a trivial proof of Gilbreath's conjecture if the conjecture holds, and offers

Load-bearing premise

The entire path to Gilbreath rests on Conjecture 5.1(4): that for the prime sequence, from n>2535 onward the right diagonal's pre-0-2 section has fewer than √n log n elements and the 0-2 cycle contains more than n^0.99 twos — stated without proof and essentially as strong as the target claim.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Conjecture 5.1(4) is true, Theorem 5.5 proves Gilbreath's conjecture: a single inductive step, n to n+1, covers all primes.
  • The prime-gap bound p_n^0.525 combined with a 0-2 cycle length above n^0.525 is sufficient; no stronger prime-distribution input is needed.
  • Magic twin primes (p−2, p) give free success steps; the paper finds them frequently enough to 'prove success' for 0.34% of positions up to 2×10^4 without relying on the conjecture.
  • Sieving results show infinite sequences that contain all primes under 17% composite density satisfy Gilbreath's property, reinforcing the thesis that the phenomenon is about gap structure.
  • The 0-2 cycle criterion yields O(n) algorithms for checking success and O(log n) binary search for the next safe term, with claimed applications to fraud scoring and random-number testing.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: Conjecture 5.1(4) is close in strength to Gilbreath itself — asserting a precise long-run structure that is exactly what a counterexample would violate — so the real test is whether that balance can be proved or refuted independently.
  • Beyond the paper: the paper's analogy between the 0-2 cycle and binary normal numbers suggests known lower bounds on digit frequencies of √2-style constants may transfer; one could look for a theorem that ν2(q_{n−1})/n has a positive liminf for all large n.
  • Beyond the paper: forbidden prime constellations imply that many adversarial gap patterns are absent from primes; a testable extension is to generate random corridor sequences with the same forbidden patterns forced out, and measure whether the remaining failure rate collapses toward zero.
  • Beyond the paper: the paper's simulations up to 10^4 are weak evidence; a dedicated computational check of Conjecture 5.1 at n=10^7 would be a decisive probe of the key premise.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a route to Gilbreath's conjecture through sifted sequences, corridor densities, and an analysis of the right diagonal of the absolute-difference triangle. Theorems 2.1–2.4 prove elementary facts about such triangles and about Δ-periodic sequences obtained by a finite Eratosthenes sieve. The central result is Theorem 5.5, which states that if a valid successful sequence has record gap < n^α and the number of 2s in the 0–2 cycle of its right diagonal satisfies ν_2 > n^β with β > α, then the sequence continues to succeed. The paper then applies this to primes using Conjecture 5.1(4), which asserts β = 0.99 for n > 2535, and the text says that if true this 'trivially proves' the conjecture. No proof of Conjecture 5.1(4) is given; in fact the manuscript states: 'None of this is proved yet despite massive empirical evidence.' The paper also derives applications to fraud detection, random-number generation, and time-series analysis from the same framework.

Significance. If the conditional framework could be made unconditional, the paper would resolve a 148-year-old open problem. The manuscript contains some correct elementary observations (Theorems 2.1 and 2.2), reproducible Python code, and a substantial empirical exploration of right-diagonal behavior, including magic primes and forbidden constellations. However, the central route to Gilbreath's conjecture is conditional on Conjecture 5.1(4), an unproved quantitative assertion about the prime right diagonal that is as strong as the target statement. Because the main theorem has no established hypothesis for primes, the paper does not constitute a proof of Gilbreath's conjecture or a verifiable step toward it.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.2, Theorem 5.5 and Conjecture 5.1(4)] Theorem 5.5 requires ν_2(q_{n−1}) > n^β with β > α, where α = 0.525 is the Baker–Harman–Pintz exponent. The only supply of β for the prime sequence is Conjecture 5.1(4), which asserts β = 0.99 for n > 2535 (or β = 0.55 for n > 16). The paper explicitly says this is unproved. Consequently, Theorem 5.5 has no applicable, established hypothesis for the primes. The sentence 'If true, it trivially proves the Gilbreath conjecture' confirms that the argument reduces the problem to an equally hard unproved statement, rather than deriving it.
  2. [Section 5.2, Conjecture 5.1(3)] Part (3) of Conjecture 5.1 asserts q_n^+ = q_n + n + o(n). As the paper admits, if this were true it would 'trivially prove' Gilbreath's conjecture, since there is always a prime in [p_n, p_n + n] for sufficiently large n. No proof or independent evidence is supplied beyond figure 1. This is thus a second unproved statement with exactly the same strength as the intended conclusion, and it is used as if it were established when discussing the path to the conjecture.
  3. [Section 2, Theorem 2.5] The proof of Theorem 2.5 consists of the sentence 'Take κ0 = 0 and the theorem is proved!' followed by a conjecture that success holds for larger κ0. This is not a proof of the theorem as stated. The result that random prime sieving yields successful sequences is therefore open, and the paper later relies on this statement as part of its 'new results with proof.' This undermines the claimed novelty of the sieving section.
  4. [Sections 3.2–3.3, Conjecture 3.1 and corridor parameters] Conjecture 3.1 asserts h(n)/g(n) → 0 for 'our corridor,' whose parameters (m = 5, α2 = 1.3, β2 = 1.5) were selected after the fact to contain the prime sequence and to minimize failures. Table 9 provides data only up to n = 11. No proof is offered that the zero-density property persists for all n, and the text notes that a different corridor configuration may lead to different conclusions. Without an unconditional estimate, this conjecture cannot support the transition from finite empirical checks to the infinite prime sequence.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2, Eq. (1)] Mertens' theorem is misspelled as 'Meterns.'
  2. [Section 4.2, Table 11] The definition of 'forbidden prime constellation' is informal; the code checks finitely many residue patterns, but the text does not give a precise definition that would allow independent verification of the 'Forbidden' column.
  3. [General] Several figures (e.g., Figure 8) are referenced before appearing and are not included in the text; this makes the reported evidence difficult to verify.
  4. [Appendix A.1] The code depends on the external package 'primePy,' but the list of required packages is incomplete; also the library 'gilbreath_lib' is not published in the arXiv source, only the listing in A.2.
  5. [Section 7, Conclusions] The conclusion states 'I proved that the Sieve of Eratosthenes leads to sequences that satisfy the conjecture. It also works if you sieve in any order.' The second claim is Theorem 2.5, whose proof is incomplete, as noted in the major comments.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 7.0 of 10

Gilbreath 'proof' assumes Conjecture 5.1(4), which already asserts the 0-2 cycle (success) for n>928; Theorem 5.5 supplies no independent hypothesis.

  1. self definitional [Section 5.2, Conjecture 5.1(4) and Theorem 5.5; see also Theorem 5.2]
    "Conjecture 5.1 ... (4) In the right diagonal δ(q_n), the section before the 0-2 cycle has fewer than √n log n elements if n > 928. This is more than what we need to prove Gilbreath’s conjecture. ... Also, (11) is satisfied if β=0.99 and n>2535 ... To prove Gilbreath, β>0.525 is enough as it is tied to the best proven bound on prime gaps."

    By Theorem 5.2, a valid sequence succeeds exactly when its right diagonal has a 0-2 cycle. The first clause of Conjecture 5.1(4) asserts that, for all n>928, the section before the 0-2 cycle has fewer than √n log n elements, which entails that a 0-2 cycle exists for every large n — i.e., it directly asserts success (Gilbreath's conclusion for the tail). The paper then invokes Theorem 5.5, whose only route to the prime case is the same conjecture: 'Independently and unrelated to primes, β=0.99 works, see part 4 in conjecture 5.1.' Thus the claimed derivation does not reduce Gilbreath to independent first principles; it assumes a quantitative statement of at least the same strength as the target, and the paper itself concedes 'None of this is proved yet despite massive empirical evidence.'

full rationale

The paper contains real partial content: Lemma 5.3 and Lemma 5.4 establish a genuine conditional induction step from ν2(q_{n−1}) > n^β to success at q_n, and external inputs such as Baker–Harman–Pintz (α=0.525) and Nagura are quoted correctly. However, the step that would take this conditional result to the primes is Conjecture 5.1(4), which is not derived but asserted. Moreover, the conjecture is not merely a technical strengthening: its assertion about the short section before the 0-2 cycle already guarantees the existence of the 0-2 cycle, hence success, for all n>928. The subsequent use of Theorem 5.5 therefore does not prove Gilbreath; it repackages the unproved conjecture as the 'input' that makes the theorem applicable. This is a central, load-bearing reduction of the target to a same-strength unproved assumption, so the circularity score is 7 rather than lower. The self-citations in the paper are not load-bearing for the main claim, and the conditional mathematics itself is not circular; the circularity is concentrated in using Conjecture 5.1(4) as the enabling hypothesis for the proof of Gilbreath.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The paper's central route relies on unproved structural assumptions about the prime sequence (balanced right diagonal, forbidden-constellation protection, vanishing corridor failure density). Several parameters (corridor constants, growth constant B, Poisson λ, exponent β) are fitted or chosen to make the heuristics work. These are the true cost of the proposed derivation.

free parameters (4)
  • Corridor upper constants α2, β2 and offset m = α2=1.3, β2=1.5, m=5
    Chosen in equation (5), Section 3.2, so the prime sequence fits inside the corridor and only one failing sequence remains for n=11; this is fitting to the target data.
  • Growth constant B = ≈1.45
    Fitted from Table 5 in Theorem 3.1's proof to describe the growth of N(σ,n); not derived.
  • Poisson mean λ for synthetic primes = 2.5
    Chosen in Section 4.1 to make rejection sampling fast; the failure patterns found depend on this choice.
  • Balance exponent β = 0.99 (or 0.55 for small n)
    Introduced in Conjecture 5.1(4) and used in Theorem 5.5; no proof is given, and it is selected to exceed α=0.525.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Eratosthenes sieve period of numbers coprime to a primorial equals the totient product.
    Used in Theorem 2.4; known number-theoretic fact, external to the paper.
  • standard math Baker–Harman–Pintz bound: p_{n+1}−p_n < p_n^{0.525}.
    External cited bound used in Lemma 5.3 and Theorem 5.5.
  • standard math Nagura and refined prime interval theorems place primes inside the chosen corridor.
    Used in Theorem 3.2 to show primes satisfy inequality (5); external.
  • domain assumption Primes avoid forbidden constellations and long low-gap runs (Statements 3.1 and 4.1).
    Argued from modular obstructions and finite simulations, but not proved to the strength needed for Gilbreath.
  • domain assumption The right diagonal of the prime sequence is balanced with ν2(q_{n−1}) > n^β (Conjecture 5.1(4)).
    This is the main unproved input to Theorem 5.5; it is essentially a quantitative success claim as strong as the target.
  • ad hoc to paper Failing sequences have zero density in the efficient corridor (Conjecture 3.1).
    Central to the proof strategy; only checked for n≤11 and 10^6 simulations, and the corridor parameters were chosen to make it plausible.
invented entities (2)
  • Magic primes
    purpose: Twin primes (p−2,p) where the right diagonal of the triangle is all 0s and 2s, guaranteeing success at p; a computed list is given.
    No proof of infinitude is given, and the list itself is the only evidence; no external falsifiable prediction is made.
  • Forbidden prime constellations independent evidence
    purpose: Gap patterns such as 2,4,2,4,2 that cannot occur in prime gaps due to modular obstructions; used to argue primes are protected from these failure modes.
    The modular obstruction is independently checkable for any finite pattern, but the step from 'pattern absent' to 'sequence succeeds' is not proved.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Piercing Gilbreath's Conjecture: From Deep Number Theory Insights to Fintech and Cybersecurity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OTHZDOEW

@misc{pith2026260704166,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Piercing Gilbreath's Conjecture: From Deep Number Theory Insights to Fintech and Cybersecurity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OTHZDOEW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.04166}
}
read the original abstract

I propose a new methodology to attack the fascinating Gilbreath's conjecture about prime numbers, first posted in 1878 and unsolved to this day. The problem statement is rudimentary: kids can understand it. However, despite decades of research, almost no progress has been made. This paper changes the game by presenting a new approach based on sieving, a number of new results with proof, a precise path to the solution, and solid references. It also introduces the concept of reverse sieving, along with applications to testing randomness, pattern and fraud detection, cybersecurity, synthetic data, sequence categorization and normalization, or to detect and quantify a new type of chaos in time series including Brownian motions. Magic primes, forbidden prime number constellations, cellular automata, and reduction via classes of equivalent sequences, are some of the innovative and promising topics discussed in the paper.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.04166 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Prime sequence: q + n , qn, q− n resp. in orange, white, green (left). Ratio (center) and delta (right) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Random sequence: q + n , qn, q− n resp. in orange, white, green (left). Ratio (center) and delta (right) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Log sequence: q + n , qn, q− n resp. in orange, white, green (left). Ratios (center) and deltas (right). The left plot in figures 1–2 shows the increasing width of the success interval In = [q − n , q+ n ] as n increases, with n on the X-axis. The sequence q1, q2 and so on, colored in white, has qn ∈ In−1. The orange and green curves are (resp.) the admissible lower and upper bounds for qn. The meaning is as follows… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Power sequence: q + n , qn, q− n resp. in orange, white, green (left). Ratio (center) and delta (right). By design, the random and the prime number sequences share a lot in common. However, there are major differences. The primes exhibit regular spikes in the upper and…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Same as figure 5 but with less severe problem. The green signal takes on 2 values only, and starts flat. Reconstructing the sequence backwards to find its canonical form, magnifies the errors as seen in figures 5 and 6. It offers another way to reveal hidden patterns, …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Random numbers generated with the code in section 6.3; each line is a level (n = 1000, 1000 levels) With binary numbers as in the above code, |a−b| = XOR(a, b). The resulting triangle is identical to the output of the rule 90 cellular automaton [Wiki], extensively stud…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Brownian motions moving in the same direction at each step; red fails the test, but the green one passes it [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 6 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Bounded gaps between primes in short intervals.Preprint, pages 1–29,

    Ryan Alweiss and Sammy Luo. Bounded gaps between primes in short intervals.Preprint, pages 1–29,

  2. [2]

    Effective estimates for some functions defined over primes.Integers, 24:227–251, 2024

    Christian Axler. Effective estimates for some functions defined over primes.Integers, 24:227–251, 2024. [Link]. 7

    2024

  3. [3]

    R. C. Baker, G. Harman, and J. Pintz. Bounded gaps between primes in short intervals.Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 83:532–562, 2001. 11, 16, 17

    2001

  4. [5]

    Scrambled linear pseudorandom number generators.ACM Trans- actions on Mathematical Software, 47:1–32, 2021

    David Blackman and Sebastiano Vigna. Scrambled linear pseudorandom number generators.ACM Trans- actions on Mathematical Software, 47:1–32, 2021. arXiv:1805.01407 [Link]. 23

    arXiv 2021

  5. [6]

    A random analogue of Gilbreath’s conjecture.Mathematische Annalen, 388:2611—-2625,

    Zachary Chase. A random analogue of Gilbreath’s conjecture.Mathematische Annalen, 388:2611—-2625,

  6. [7]

    Gilbreath’s conjecture: a Cram´ er random model and a deterministic analysis.Preprint, pages 1–28, 2026

    Zachary Chase, Zach Hunter, and Terence Tao. Gilbreath’s conjecture: a Cram´ er random model and a deterministic analysis.Preprint, pages 1–28, 2026. arXiv:2607.08712 [Link]. 11

    arXiv 2026

  7. [8]

    Generation of multivariate discrete data with generalized Poisson, negative binomial and binomial marginal distributions.Preprint, pages 1–19, 2026

    Chak Kwong Cheng and Hakan Demirtas. Generation of multivariate discrete data with generalized Poisson, negative binomial and binomial marginal distributions.Preprint, pages 1–19, 2026. arXiv:2602.07707 [Link]. 11

    arXiv 2026

  8. [9]

    Random sieves and generalized leader- election.Austrian Journal of Statistics, 52:13–25, 2023

    Congzao Dong, Alexander Marynych, and Viacheslav Melnykov. Random sieves and generalized leader- election.Austrian Journal of Statistics, 52:13–25, 2023. 4

    2023

Show all 30 references
  1. [10]

    Explicit estimates of some functions over primes.The Ramanujan Journal, 45:227–251,

    Pierre Dusart. Explicit estimates of some functions over primes.The Ramanujan Journal, 45:227–251,

  2. [11]

    Large gaps between consecutive prime numbers.Annals of Mathematics, 183:935–974,

    Kevin Ford et al. Large gaps between consecutive prime numbers.Annals of Mathematics, 183:935–974,

  3. [12]

    Springer, 2023

    Henryk Fuk´ s.Solvable Cellular Automata, Methods and Applications. Springer, 2023. [Link]. 23

    2023

  4. [13]

    Goldston, J´ anos Pintz, and Cem Y

    Daniel A. Goldston, J´ anos Pintz, and Cem Y. Y ´ ıld ´ ır ´ ım. Primes in tuples I.Annals of Mathematics, 170:819–862, 2009. [Link]. 12

    2009

  5. [14]

    Harald Cram´ er and the distribution of prime numbers.Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 1:12–28, 1995

    Andrew Granville. Harald Cram´ er and the distribution of prime numbers.Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 1:12–28, 1995. [Link]. 4

    1995

  6. [15]

    MLT, 2023

    Vincent Granville.Gentle Introduction To Chaotic Dynamical Systems. MLT, 2023. [Link]. 24

    2023

  7. [16]

    MLT, 2026

    Vincent Granville.Breakthroughs on the Digit Distribution of Classic Constants. MLT, 2026. [Link]. 17, 22, 23

    2026

  8. [17]

    LLMs without deep neural networks: New architecture, benefits and case study

    Vincent Granville. LLMs without deep neural networks: New architecture, benefits and case study. Preprint, pages 1–9, 2026. arXiv:2605.30385 [Link]. 23

    2026 arXiv

  9. [18]

    Cycles and patterns in the sieve of Eratosthenes.Preprint, pages 1–18, 2019

    George Grob and Matthias Schmitt. Cycles and patterns in the sieve of Eratosthenes.Preprint, pages 1–18, 2019. arXiv:1905:03117 [Link]. 4

    2019

  10. [19]

    P.G. Guest. The estimation of standard error from successive finite differences.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 3:233–237, 1951. [Link]. 21

    1951

  11. [20]

    The Poisson tail conjecture for primes in short intervals.Preprint, pages 1–30, 2026

    Abhishek Jha. The Poisson tail conjecture for primes in short intervals.Preprint, pages 1–30, 2026. arXiv:2605.23014 [Link]. 11

    2026 arXiv

  12. [21]

    Statistical distributions of prime number gaps.Journal of Advances in Mathematics and Computer Science, 39:36–61, 2024

    Daniele Lattanzi. Statistical distributions of prime number gaps.Journal of Advances in Mathematics and Computer Science, 39:36–61, 2024. [Link]. 11

    2024

  13. [22]

    Chains of large gaps between consecutive primes.Advances in Mathematics, 39:257–269,

    Helmut Maier. Chains of large gaps between consecutive primes.Advances in Mathematics, 39:257–269,

  14. [23]

    Small gaps between primes.Annals of Mathematics, 181:383–413, 2015

    James Maynard. Small gaps between primes.Annals of Mathematics, 181:383–413, 2015. [Link]. 12

    2015

  15. [24]

    Holes in valid-extension sets of finite gilbreath sequences.Preprint, pages 1–36, 2026

    Leila Muney. Holes in valid-extension sets of finite gilbreath sequences.Preprint, pages 1–36, 2026. arXiv:2606.23721 [Link]. 2

    2026 arXiv

  16. [25]

    On the distribution of gaps between consecutive primes.The Ramanujan Journal, 45:1–22,

    Janos Pintz. On the distribution of gaps between consecutive primes.The Ramanujan Journal, 45:1–22,

  17. [26]

    arXiv:2510:06688 [Link]

    Simon Plouffe.Preprint, Verification of Gilbreath’s conjecture up to 10 14:1–7, 2025. arXiv:2510:06688 [Link]. 1, 4

    2025

  18. [27]

    Large gaps between consecutive prime numbers.Terence Tao’s Blog, 2014

    Terence Tao. Large gaps between consecutive prime numbers.Terence Tao’s Blog, 2014. [Link]. 4

    2014

  19. [28]

    On the maximal gap between primes.Preprint, pages 1–8, 2025

    Wang and Cheng-Ting. On the maximal gap between primes.Preprint, pages 1–8, 2025. arXiv:2510.17065v1 [Link]. 11

    2025

  20. [29]

    On differences between consecutive numbers coprime to primorials.Preprint, pages 1–14,

    Mario Ziller. On differences between consecutive numbers coprime to primorials.Preprint, pages 1–14,

  21. [2017]

    arXiv:1707.05437 [Link]. 11 25

    arXiv

  22. [2020]

    --- Part 1: gil.check\n

    arXiv:2007:01808 [Link]. 4 26 A Appendix: Python code The main programgilbreath3.pyis listed in section A.1. It importsgilbreath lib.py, a home-made, internal library. The latter is listed in section A.2. Also, in section A.1, I included a summary, linking the various parts an...

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.