Abstract

The purpose of this article is two-folds. Firstly, we establish two sufficient conditions under which the sequence {f(n)(modm):n≥1}\{f(n)\pmod{m}: n\geq1\} is non-periodic, where f(n)f(n) is an arithmetic function. As consequences, we deduce that the sequences associated with the Ramanujan tau function τ(n)τ(n) as well as the Fourier coefficients of certain normalized Eisenstein series Ek(z)E_k(z) modulo mm are non-periodic. Further, we deduce that the sequence arising from Nathanson's totient function Φ(n)Φ(n), the classical Euler's totient function φ(n)\varphi(n), sum of divisor function σ(n)σ(n), their Dirichlet convolution σ∗φ(n)σ*\varphi(n), Jordan's totient function Jk(n)J_k(n), and unitary totient function φ∗(n)\varphi^*(n) modulo mm, are non-periodic for certain modulo mm. In addition, we extend a result of Ayad and Kihel \cite{r1} on the non-periodicity of certain arithmetic function g(n)g(n). On the other hand, we construct several transcendental numbers arising from the continued fractions attached with τ(n)τ(n), Ek(z)E_k(z), Φ(n)Φ(n), g(n)g(n), φ(n)\varphi(n), σ(n)σ(n), σ∗φ(n)σ*\varphi(n), Jk(n)J_k(n), and φ∗(n)\varphi^*(n).

AI-generated audit

Audit summary

Audited against arXiv v2

Not a correctness certificate. A green “no issues found” result may include yellow suspected typos or minor formal issues that do not affect substantive soundness. It means this audit found no unresolved substantive error under the stated criteria; it does not replace expert scrutiny or formal verification.

Current report

Detailed mathematical audit

Generated October 23, 2026
01Statements2 reported findingsNo statement issues found

The two general non-periodicity criteria apply to the listed modular-form coefficients and multiplicative arithmetic functions with the stated modulus restrictions. The decimal constructions use residues in {0,…,9}\{0,\ldots,9\}, and the resulting irrationality hypotheses match the continued-fraction transcendence theorem. No false central statement was found.

Theorems 1.1 and 1.3–1.10No issue found

The non-periodicity criteria cover every listed application

PDF pages 2–4 and 7–10 · Theorems 1.1, 1.3, and 1.6–1.10 · arXiv:2602.13300v2

Eventual periodicity lets the proof multiply a suitably chosen prime index by a new prime in a prescribed progression. Divisibility or square-free multiplicativity then forces a residue different from the periodic one. The Ramanujan congruences, Eisenstein coefficients, and prime-value formulas for the totient and divisor functions supply exactly the two distinct residues required; the exceptional moduli in Theorem 1.3 are precisely those that would collapse them.

Theorem 1.11No issue found

The continued-fraction parameters are irrational in every stated case

PDF pages 4–5 and 10–14 · Lemmas 3.3–3.5 and proof of Theorem 1.11 · arXiv:2602.13300v2

A rational base-ten expansion has eventually periodic digits. For the larger moduli attached to Φ\Phi and gg, the extra reduction modulo 1010 is shown non-periodic by a prime-progression argument; all other cases restrict the modulus so the residue itself is a decimal digit. The resulting number lies in (0,1)(0,1) and is irrational, so the quoted Adamczewski–Bugeaud–Davison theorem applies to the sequence 1+(⌊nθ⌋ mod k)1+(\lfloor n\theta\rfloor\bmod k).

02Proofs2 reported findingsNo proof issues found

The Dirichlet-progression contradictions, modular computations, digit non-periodicity lemmas, and final transcendence reduction were checked. The chosen prime factors are distinct, the multiplicativity hypotheses are used only on square-free products, and the modulus restrictions keep all required residues distinct. No incorrect or materially incomplete proof was found.

Theorems 1.9–1.10No issue found in the reviewed proof

The prime-progression construction contradicts eventual periodicity

PDF pages 7–8 · opening of Section 3 · arXiv:2602.13300v2

Starting from a prime index beyond the eventual-periodicity threshold, the proof chooses a second prime congruent to 11 modulo the relevant modulus and period. Their product is in the same periodic residue class as the first prime. Divisibility forces zero in Theorem 1.9, while multiplicativity forces r2r1r_2r_1 in Theorem 1.10, contradicting the prescribed nonzero or distinct residue.

Lemmas 3.3–3.5No issue found in the reviewed proof

Reduction modulo ten retains enough information for the two unrestricted modulus families

PDF pages 10–12 · Lemmas 3.3–3.5 · arXiv:2602.13300v2

For Φ\Phi, the selected prime classes make the reduced value nonzero modulo ten while a divisible composite index gives zero. For gg, taking finite differences and using g(n+1)−g(n)=Φ(n+1)/2g(n+1)-g(n)=\Phi(n+1)/2 reduces periodicity to the elementary carry lemma; the congruence restrictions on mm exclude both allowed carry residues. These arguments establish non-eventual periodicity of the actual decimal digit sequences used later.

03Novelty0 reported findingsNo novelty concerns found

No non-novelty findings.

Detailed audit reportFull reasoning, manuscript locations, and references.
Open report PDF ↗

Author response

Challenge an audit finding

Local workflow preview

A listed author may submit formal evidence that an audit is inaccurate. The response would be considered in a fresh AI re-evaluation; it would not edit the audit automatically.

Paper
arXiv:2602.13300v2
Authors listed
Tapas Chatterjee, Sagar Mandal
Audit date
October 23, 2026
  1. 01Establish identityMatch an authenticated scholarly identity to this paper.
  2. 02Submit evidenceIdentify the finding and give a formal mathematical response.
  3. 03Re-evaluateA separate agent checks the response and records a disposition.
Recommended production method

Authenticate with ORCID, then require an exact arXiv match

MathAudit should accept the identity only when ORCID OAuth authenticates the claimant's iD and this exact arXiv paper appears in arXiv's public authority feed for that iD. A matching name alone is not sufficient.

ORCID OAuth and arXiv authority-record lookup are not connected in this local prototype.

Email fallback for papers without a linked ORCID

A production fallback could send a one-time link only when the submitted address matches an independently maintained author-contact allowlist for this paper. MathAudit must return the same message for every address so the form cannot reveal which contacts are on that list.

This demonstration does not send, store, or compare the address.

Structured response preview

This form remains unavailable until production identity verification succeeds. Nothing entered here is submitted.

This panel never establishes authorship in the local prototype. A production result should be described narrowly as an authenticated ORCID match or control of a separately allowlisted author-contact mailbox.