This article uses technical mathematical notation for logarithms. All instances of log(x) without a subscript base should be interpreted as a natural logarithm, also commonly written as ln(x) or loge(x).
A prime gap is the difference between two successive prime numbers. The n-th prime gap, denoted gn or g(pn) is the difference between the (n + 1)-st and the n-th prime numbers, i.e.
We have g1 = 1, g2 = g3 = 2, and g4 = 4. The sequence (gn) of prime gaps has been extensively studied; however, many questions and conjectures remain unanswered.
By the definition of gn every prime can be written as
Simple observations
The first, smallest, and only odd prime gap is the gap of size 1 between 2, the only even prime number, and 3, the first odd prime. All other prime gaps are even. There is only one pair of consecutive gaps having length 2: the gaps g2 and g3 between the primes 3, 5, and 7.
For any integern, the factorialn! is the product of all positive integers up to and including n. Then in the sequence
the first term is divisible by 2, the second term is divisible by 3, and so on. Thus, this is a sequence of n − 1 consecutive composite integers, and it must belong to a gap between primes having length at least n. It follows that there are gaps between primes that are arbitrarily large, that is, for any integer N, there is an integer m with gm ≥ N.
However, prime gaps of n numbers can occur at numbers much smaller than n!. For instance, the first prime gap of size larger than 14 occurs between the primes 523 and 541, while 15! is the vastly larger number 1307674368000.
The average gap between primes increases as the natural logarithm of these primes, and therefore the ratio of the prime gap to the primes involved decreases (and is asymptotically zero). This is a consequence of the prime number theorem. From a heuristic view, we expect the probability that the ratio of the length of the gap to the natural logarithm is greater than or equal to a fixed positive number k to be e−k; consequently the ratio can be arbitrarily large. Indeed, the ratio of the gap to the number of digits of the integers involved does increase without bound. This is a consequence of a result by Westzynthius.[2]
In the opposite direction, the twin prime conjecture posits that gn = 2 for infinitely many integers n.
Numerical results
Usually the ratio of is called the merit of the gap gn. Informally, the merit of a gap gn can be thought of as the ratio of the size of the gap compared to the average prime gap sizes in the vicinity of pn.
The largest known prime gap with identified probable prime gap ends has length 16,045,848, with 385,713-digit probable primes and merit M = 18.067, found by Andreas Höglund in March 2024.[3] The largest known prime gap with identified proven primes as gap ends has length 1,113,106 and merit 25.90, with 18,662-digit primes found by P. Cami, M. Jansen and J. K. Andersen.[4][5]
As of September 2022[update], the largest known merit value and first with merit over 40, as discovered by the Gapcoin network, is 41.93878373 with the 87-digit prime 293703234068022590158723766104419463425709075574811762098588798217895728858676728143227. The prime gap between it and the next prime is 8350.[6][7]
The Cramér–Shanks–Granville ratio is the ratio of gn / (ln(pn))2.[6] If we discard anomalously high values of the ratio for the primes 2, 3, 7, then the greatest known value of this ratio is 0.9206386 for the prime 1693182318746371. Other record terms can be found at OEIS: A111943.
We say that gn is a maximal gap, if gm < gn for all m < n. As of October 2024[update], the largest known maximal prime gap has length 1676, found by Brian Kehrig. It is the 83rd maximal prime gap, and it occurs after the prime 20733746510561442863.[11] Other record (maximal) gap sizes can be found in OEIS: A005250, with the corresponding primes pn in OEIS: A002386, and the values of n in OEIS: A005669. The sequence of maximal gaps up to the nth prime is conjectured to have about terms[12] (see table below).
The 83 known maximal prime gaps
Number 1 to 28
#
gn
pn
n
1
1
2
1
2
2
3
2
3
4
7
4
4
6
23
9
5
8
89
24
6
14
113
30
7
18
523
99
8
20
887
154
9
22
1,129
189
10
34
1,327
217
11
36
9,551
1,183
12
44
15,683
1,831
13
52
19,609
2,225
14
72
31,397
3,385
15
86
155,921
14,357
16
96
360,653
30,802
17
112
370,261
31,545
18
114
492,113
40,933
19
118
1,349,533
103,520
20
132
1,357,201
104,071
21
148
2,010,733
149,689
22
154
4,652,353
325,852
23
180
17,051,707
1,094,421
24
210
20,831,323
1,319,945
25
220
47,326,693
2,850,174
26
222
122,164,747
6,957,876
27
234
189,695,659
10,539,432
28
248
191,912,783
10,655,462
Number 29 to 56
#
gn
pn
n
29
250
387,096,133
20,684,332
30
282
436,273,009
23,163,298
31
288
1,294,268,491
64,955,634
32
292
1,453,168,141
72,507,380
33
320
2,300,942,549
112,228,683
34
336
3,842,610,773
182,837,804
35
354
4,302,407,359
203,615,628
36
382
10,726,904,659
486,570,087
37
384
20,678,048,297
910,774,004
38
394
22,367,084,959
981,765,347
39
456
25,056,082,087
1,094,330,259
40
464
42,652,618,343
1,820,471,368
41
468
127,976,334,671
5,217,031,687
42
474
182,226,896,239
7,322,882,472
43
486
241,160,624,143
9,583,057,667
44
490
297,501,075,799
11,723,859,927
45
500
303,371,455,241
11,945,986,786
46
514
304,599,508,537
11,992,433,550
47
516
416,608,695,821
16,202,238,656
48
532
461,690,510,011
17,883,926,781
49
534
614,487,453,523
23,541,455,083
50
540
738,832,927,927
28,106,444,830
51
582
1,346,294,310,749
50,070,452,577
52
588
1,408,695,493,609
52,302,956,123
53
602
1,968,188,556,461
72,178,455,400
54
652
2,614,941,710,599
94,906,079,600
55
674
7,177,162,611,713
251,265,078,335
56
716
13,829,048,559,701
473,258,870,471
Number 56 to 83
#
gn
pn
n
57
766
19,581,334,192,423
662,221,289,043
58
778
42,842,283,925,351
1,411,461,642,343
59
804
90,874,329,411,493
2,921,439,731,020
60
806
171,231,342,420,521
5,394,763,455,325
61
906
218,209,405,436,543
6,822,667,965,940
62
916
1,189,459,969,825,483
35,315,870,460,455
63
924
1,686,994,940,955,803
49,573,167,413,483
64
1,132
1,693,182,318,746,371
49,749,629,143,526
65
1,184
43,841,547,845,541,059
1,175,661,926,421,598
66
1,198
55,350,776,431,903,243
1,475,067,052,906,945
67
1,220
80,873,624,627,234,849
2,133,658,100,875,638
68
1,224
203,986,478,517,455,989
5,253,374,014,230,870
69
1,248
218,034,721,194,214,273
5,605,544,222,945,291
70
1,272
305,405,826,521,087,869
7,784,313,111,002,702
71
1,328
352,521,223,451,364,323
8,952,449,214,971,382
72
1,356
401,429,925,999,153,707
10,160,960,128,667,332
73
1,370
418,032,645,936,712,127
10,570,355,884,548,334
74
1,442
804,212,830,686,677,669
20,004,097,201,301,079
75
1,476
1,425,172,824,437,699,411
34,952,141,021,660,495
76
1,488
5,733,241,593,241,196,731
135,962,332,505,694,894
77
1,510
6,787,988,999,657,777,797
160,332,893,561,542,066
78
1,526
15,570,628,755,536,096,243
360,701,908,268,316,580
79
1,530
17,678,654,157,568,189,057
408,333,670,434,942,092
80
1,550
18,361,375,334,787,046,697
423,731,791,997,205,041
81
1,552
18,470,057,946,260,698,231
426,181,820,436,140,029
82
1,572
18,571,673,432,051,830,099
428,472,240,920,394,477
83
1,676
20,733,746,510,561,442,863
477,141,032,543,986,017
Further results
Upper bounds
Bertrand's postulate, proven in 1852, states that there is always a prime number between k and 2k, so in particular pn +1 < 2pn, which means gn < pn .
The prime number theorem, proven in 1896, says that the average length of the gap between a prime p and the next prime will asymptotically approach ln(p), the natural logarithm of p, for sufficiently large primes. The actual length of the gap might be much more or less than this. However, one can deduce from the prime number theorem an upper bound on the length of prime gaps:
For every , there is a number such that for all
.
One can also deduce that the gaps get arbitrarily smaller in proportion to the primes: the quotient
Hoheisel (1930) was the first to show[13] that there exists a constant θ < 1 such that
Hoheisel obtained the possible value 32999/33000 for θ. This was improved to 249/250 by Heilbronn,[14] and to θ = 3/4 + ε, for any ε > 0, by Chudakov.[15]
A major improvement is due to Ingham,[16] who showed that for some positive constant c,
An immediate consequence of Ingham's result is that there is always a prime number between n3 and (n + 1)3, if n is sufficiently large.[17] The Lindelöf hypothesis would imply that Ingham's formula holds for c any positive number: but even this would not be enough to imply that there is a prime number between n2 and (n + 1)2 for n sufficiently large (see Legendre's conjecture). To verify this, a stronger result such as Cramér's conjecture would be needed.
Huxley in 1972 showed that one may choose θ = 7/12 = 0.58(3).[18]
A result, due to Baker, Harman and Pintz in 2001, shows that θ may be taken to be 0.525.[19]
meaning that there are infinitely many gaps that do not exceed 70 million.[21] A Polymath Project collaborative effort to optimize Zhang's bound managed to lower the bound to 4680 on July 20, 2013.[22] In November 2013, James Maynard introduced a new refinement of the GPY sieve, allowing him to reduce the bound to 600 and show that for any m there exists a bounded interval with an infinite number of translations each of which containing m prime numbers.[23] Using Maynard's ideas, the Polymath project improved the bound to 246;[22][24] assuming the Elliott–Halberstam conjecture and its generalized form, the bound has been reduced to 12 and 6, respectively.[22]
Lower bounds
In 1931, Erik Westzynthius proved that maximal prime gaps grow more than logarithmically. That is,[2]
In 1938, Robert Rankin proved the existence of a constant c > 0 such that the inequality
holds for infinitely many values of n, improving the results of Westzynthius and Paul Erdős. He later showed that one can take any constant c < eγ, where γ is the Euler–Mascheroni constant. The value of the constant c was improved in 1997 to any value less than 2eγ.[25]
Paul Erdős offered a $10,000 prize for a proof or disproof that the constant c in the above inequality may be taken arbitrarily large.[26] This was proved to be correct in 2014 by Ford–Green–Konyagin–Tao and, independently, James Maynard.[27][28]
The result was further improved to
for infinitely many values of n by Ford–Green–Konyagin–Maynard–Tao.[29]
In the spirit of Erdős' original prize, Terence Tao offered US$10,000 for a proof that c may be taken arbitrarily large in this inequality.[30]
Lower bounds for chains of primes have also been determined.[31]
Conjectures about gaps between primes
Even better results are possible under the Riemann hypothesis. Harald Cramér proved[32] that the Riemann hypothesis implies the gap gn satisfies
using the big O notation. (In fact this result needs only the weaker Lindelöf hypothesis, if one can tolerate an infinitesimally larger exponent.[33])
Later, he conjectured that the gaps are even smaller. Roughly speaking, Cramér's conjecture states that
If this conjecture is true, then the function satisfies [34] It implies a strong form of Cramér's conjecture but is inconsistent with the heuristics of Granville and Pintz[35][36][37] which suggest that infinitely often for any where denotes the Euler–Mascheroni constant.
Meanwhile, Oppermann's conjecture is weaker than Cramér's conjecture. The expected gap size with Oppermann's conjecture is on the order of
As a result, under Oppermann's conjecture there exists (probably ) for which every natural number satisfies
Polignac's conjecture states that every positive even number k occurs as a prime gap infinitely often. The case k = 2 is the twin prime conjecture. The conjecture has not yet been proven or disproven for any specific value of k, but the improvements on Zhang's result discussed above prove that it is true for at least one (currently unknown) value of k ≤ 246.
As an arithmetic function
The gap gn between the nth and (n + 1)st prime numbers is an example of an arithmetic function. In this context it is usually denoted dn and called the prime difference function.[38] The function is neither multiplicative nor additive.
^ abWestzynthius, E. (1931), "Über die Verteilung der Zahlen die zu den n ersten Primzahlen teilerfremd sind", Commentationes Physico-Mathematicae Helsingsfors (in German), 5: 1–37, JFM57.0186.02, Zbl0003.24601.
^Andersen, Jens Kruse (March 8, 2013). "A megagap with merit 25.9". primerecords.dk. Archived from the original on December 25, 2019. Retrieved September 29, 2022.
^Nicely, Thomas R. (2019). "TABLES OF PRIME GAPS". faculty.lynchburg.edu. Archived from the original on November 27, 2020. Retrieved September 29, 2022.
^Hoheisel, G. (1930). "Primzahlprobleme in der Analysis". Sitzunsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. 33: 3–11. JFM56.0172.02.