APPROXIMATE FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF

PRIME NUMBERS
Dedicated to Hans Rademacher
on the occasion of his seventieth birthday
BY
J. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD
1. Acknowledgments
The maior portion of Rosser’s work on this paper was done at Cornell
University with support from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research. His
recent work was done as an employee of the Communications Research Divi-
sion (Proiect FOCUS) of the Institute for Defense Analyses. Schoenfeld’s
work was begun at the Westinghouse Research Laboratories and was com-
pleted at the Pennsylvania State University.
Three maior computations were performed to obtain various of the data
listed herein. The first was performed some nine years ago by workers under
the direction of Mr. Marvin Howard at the Institute for Numerical Analysis,
then part of the National Bureau of Standards, with support from the Office
of Naval Research. The second was performed some four years ago with the
cooperation of Professor R. J. Walker on the IBM 650 at the Cornell Com-
puting Center, with support from the National Science Foundation. The
third was performed recently with the cooperation of Dr. Kenneth I. Appel
at the Computing Center of and with the support of Proiect FOCUS.

2. Introduction
Counting 2 as the first prime, we denote by (x), (x), and (x), respec-
tively, the number of primes =< x, the logarithm of the product of all primes
=< x, and the logarithm of the least common multiple of all positive integers
-< x; if x < 2, we take v(x) O(x) (x) 0. We also let pn denote the
nth prime, and (n) denote the number of positive integers __< n and rela-
tively prime to n. Throughout, n shall denote a positive integer, p a prime,
and x a real number. We shall present approximate formulas for (x),
(x), (x), pn, (n), and other functions related to prime numbers.
In 1808, on the basis of attempting to fit known values of r(x) by an em-
pirical formula, Legendre coniectured an approximation very similar to that
given below in (2.19). In 1849, again on the basis of counts of the number
of primes in various intervals, Gauss communicated to Encke a coniecture
that in the neighborhood of the number x the average density of the primes
is 1/log x. On this basis, if one should wish an estimate for the sum of f(p)
over all primes p -< x, the natural approximation would be
Received February 13, 1961.
64
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 65

(2.1)
<=x
.
’ fxf(P) log y
f(y) dy

Consequently, one would presume the following approximations"

1-----f
-
dy
(2.2) r(x)
_<_ log y

(2.3) 0(x) log p dy x,

(2.4)
_<_
1
,fx dy
y log y
loglogx-l-B,

(2.5) log P
p
/ dyy
.2
log x + E,
II
(2.6)
exp cl (a) a
v<_-x c()
(log x) ’
where is a real constant, usually taken to be unity.
a
In (2.4) we have indicated a "constant of integration," B, whose value is
taken to be
lim __< 1/p log log z}.
Because this limit exists, the absolute error in (2.4) tends to zero as x tends
to infinity. In (2.5) and (2.6), we have indicated constants E, cl(a), nd
c(a) for analogous reasons. In (2.2) nd (2.3), no constants are indicated
because the limits to which they would correspond do not exist.
The validity of the approximations (2.2) through (2.6) was rigorously
established iust before the turn of the century by Hadmrd and de la Valle
Poussin. A very excellent account of these matters is given in Ingham [6],
together with extensive references to the literature.
From Ingham [6], we can get alternate expressions for B, E, and c(1) as
follows:
(2.7) B C -t-- {log [1 (l/p)] + (l/p)},
(2.s) E C n= (log p)/pn,
(2.9) c(1) e-c,
where C is Euler’s constant. We find (2.7) and (2.9) on pp. 22-23 of Ing-
ham [6], and cn derive (2.8) from a formula near the top of p. 81. Approxi-
mate numerical values re"
B 0.26149 72128 47643,
(2.11) E 1.33258 22757 33221,
66 $. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

(2.12) C(1) 0.56145 94835 66885,

(2.13) 1/C(1) 1.78107 24179 90198,
(2.14) C(2) 0.83242 90656 62.
Let us define the logarithmic integral li(x) by
(2.15) li(x) El(log x),
where El(y) is the exponential integral, defined by

(2.16) Ei(y) lim + e----

Then
dy
(2.17) li(x) li(2).
logy
Consequently, in place of (2.2), it is common to use li() as an approximation
for (). This is more convenient than (2.2) because El(y) has been exten-
sively tubulated; a convenient tabulation is given in the W.P.A. Tables
[18], in which the reder should note the supplementury Table III at the end
of Vol. II.
If we use two terms of the asymptotic expansion for li(x), we get the follow-
ing convenient approximation"

(2.18) -(x) =
log log
Using a closer approximagion for li(z) gives ghe sharper resulg"

(2.19) (x) 1"

log x
From this, we see that a suitable approximation for Pn is given by
(2.20) p n(log n + log log n 1).
Much work has been done in estimating the orders of magnitude of the
errors in the various approximations listed above. A classic result appears
as Theorem 23 on p. 65 of Ingham [6] in the form
(2.21) (x) li(x) + 0( exp {-a(log ):}),
where a is a positive bsolute constant. This means that there are positive
ubsolute constants a, b, and X such that for x X
(2.22) ]z(x) li(x) < bx exp {-a(log )}.
Improvements of this sort of result continue to appear. The sharpest
known, given in Vinogradov [17], is
(2.23) v(x) li(x) + O(x exp {-a(log x) /}).
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 67

Undoubtedly this is not the best possible result, but the precise behavior of
r(x) li(x) depends on the location of the zeros of the Riemann zeta func-
tion, and cannot be determined until we have more precise information about
them than we have now. A discussion of this point appears in Chap. IV of
Ingham [6].
Even in our present ignorance about the zeros of the zeta function, it can
be shown that li(x) alone cannot be a wholly satisfactory approximation to
r(x). Specifically, it has been shown that there is a sequence of values of x,
tending to infinity, at which alternately
(x) li(x) > xl/2/1Og X
and
(x) li(x) < xl/2/log x.
Indeed, Theorem 35 on p. 103 of Ingham [6] states a significantly stronger
result. An analogous result for O(x) x follows from Theorem 34 on p.
100 of Ingham [6] by means of the relations
(2.24) k(x)
(2.25) O(x) Zn=l p(n)b(xl/n).
Each of these summations is in fact only finite, since the summands become
zero as soon as n > (log x)/(log 2). The first of these equations is derived
on p. 12 of Ingham [6], and inversion of the first gives the second, in which
is the MSbius function defined on p. 567 of Landau [7], vol. 2.
Once one has a good estimate for r(x) li(x), one can get an approxima-
tion for sums of functions of primes as follows. Using the Stieltjes integral,
one has
.,
p_
f(p) f(y) dr(y).

Integration by parts gives

_, f(p) f(x)(x) f’(y)r(y) dy

f’(y) li(y) dy
f f’(y) r(y) ]i(y)} dy.

Then integration by parts gives

(2.26)
_,
_<_
f(p)
f f(y) dy
log y -t-
f(2) li(2)

+ f(x){r(x) li(x)} f’(y){.(y) ]i(y)/ dy,

which is the precise version of (2.1). If the integral in (2.28) below con-
8 J. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

verges, we can rewrite (2.26) as

<__ log y
(2.27)
-t-f(x)/r(x)- li(x)}-t- f’()/’() li()} d,
where K is the eonsgant given by
(2.28) g] f(2) li(2) f’(y){.(y) li(y)} dy.

Using these, we can get sharper forms of (2.3) through (2.6). Thus,
from (2.21) und (2.26), we get
(2.29) O(x) x + O(x exp {-a(log z) /} ).
From (2.21) and (2.27), we get
(2.30) _,,<= lip log log x 4- B 4- 0(exp {-a(log x) /} ),
(2.31) _<_ (log p)/p log x 4- E 4- 0(exp {-a(log x) 1/}).
From (2.30) we proceed as in (2.6) to get
0(exp {-a(log x) }).
,<_<_ (log x) 4-
From (2.29) and (2.24), one can get a formula for (x) analogous to (2.29).
By starting from (2.23) rather than (2.21), one can get even sharper results
than (2.29) through (2.32).
Though results like those above are interesting, and are difficult to prove,
they are of little use for getting dependable numerical approximations unless
values of a, b, and X in (2.22) are furnished; this is seldom done. In Rosser
[12], explicit bounds were presented for the errors in our approximations.
More recently, much better bounds have been obtained by using modern
computing machinery and taking advantage of new information about the
zeros of the zeta function. These results will be stated in the early part of
the present paper, with the proofs being mainly withheld until the later
sections.
3. Widely applicable approximations
For a very sharp approximation, one must either use complicated formulas
or be satisfied with validity over a limited range. In this section, we shall
list approximations which combine the advantages of being reasonably simple,
reasonably precise, and valid for nearly all values. Note that Theorem 1
below will replace (2.18) by closely related and specific inequalities, while
Theorems 2-7 will do the same for (2.19), (2.20), (2.3), (2.4), (2.5), and
(2.6) respectively. Theorem 8 is a variant of Theorem 7 which is sometimes
more convenient.
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 69

THEOREM 1. We have
(3.1) x
log x (1- 2
1
)
log------ <r(x) for59 < x,

(3.2) (x) x(
<l-ogx 1 +21ogx 3) for l<x.
THEOREM 2. We have
(3.3) x/(log x 1/2) < (x) for 67 _-< x,
(3.4) x
r(x) < (log x ) for e a/2 < x
(and hence for 4.48169 <_- x).
COROLLARY 1. We have
(3.5) x/log x < v(x) for 17 <= x,
(3.6) (x) < 1.25506 x/log x for 1 < x.
COnOLLAnY 2. For 1 < x < 113 and for 113.6 =< x
(3.7) (x) < 5x/(4 log x).
COROLLARY 3. We have
(3.8) 3x/(5 log x) < r(2x) (x) for 201/2 =< x,
(3.9) 0 < r(2x) r(x) < 7x/(5 log x) for 1 < x.
For the ranges of x for which these corollaries do not follow directly from
the theorem, they can be verified by reference to Lehmer’s table of primes
[10]. A similar remark applies to all corollaries of this section unless a proof
is indicated.
The inequality (3.8) improves a result of Finsler [3]. The left side of
(3.9) is just the classic result, conjectured by Bertrand (and known as
Bertrand’s Postulate) and proved in Tchebichef [14], that there is at least
one prime between x and 2x. The right side of (3.9) gives a result of Finsler
[3], with Finsler’s integral n replaced by our real x. Finsler’s elementary
proofs are reproduced in Trost [15] on p. 58. The relation (3.12) below
states a result of Rosser [11].
THEOREM 3. We have
(3.10) n(log n+ log log n -) < Pn for 2-<n,
(3.11) p, < n(log n -+- log log n 1/2) for 20 <__ n.
COROLLARY. We have
(.12)
(.1) p, <
n log n
n(log n

-
<: Pn
log log n)
forl <_ n,
for6 <__n.
70 J. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

THEOREM 4. We have
(3.14) x(1 1/(2 log x)) < O(x) for 563 _<_ x,
(3.15) O(x) < x( + /(2 og x)) for 1

_
CoaoaY. We have
(3.16) x(1 1/log x) < O(x) for41 <=x.
THEOREM 5. We have
(3.17)
(3.18)

(3.19)
(3.20)
_,
log logx +B- 1/(2logsx) < _<xl/p
<= 1/p < log log x B 1/(2 log x)
COROLLARY. We have

THEOREM 6. We have
(3.21) log x + E
_,
log log x <

1/(2 log x) <

1/p - -_
<= lip < log log x + B -+- 1/log x
for 1 <: x,
for 286 __< x.

for l < x,
for l

(log p)/p for 1 < x,

(3.22) _<_ (log p)/p < log x + E + 1/(2 log x) for 319 -< x.
COROLLARY. We have
(3.23) <__(logp)/p <logx-E+ 1/logx for 32 _<_ x,
(3.24) =< (log p)/p < log x for
THEOREM 7. We have
e
(3.25) log z
l--
2 log for 285 _<_ x,

(3.26) II (1-- p1-

p<__x ) <1 1 -I" 21og.z for 1

COrOllArY. We have
e-C
(3.27) (1 for1 <x.
THEOREM 8. We hve
(3.28) e (logx) 1--2logsx p--1 for 1 < x,

P
(3.29) II
_<_p 1
<e e(logx) 1-t-21ogsx for 286 -< x.

COROLLARY 1. We have
(3.30) < e (log ) ( + o1)x for1 <x.
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 71

COROLLARY 2. We have
1
(3.31) II p P
,_ 1
< eC E
1< n forl <__ x.

THEOREM 9. We have
(3.32) O(x) < 1.01624 x for 0 < x.
For better bound for 0(x) when x _<_ 10s, note Theorem 18 below.
THEOREM 10. For d <-_ x, we have cx < O(x) for each of the following pairs
of values of c and d"
c

d
.00.0,01.0__01
7481
.01
53811 34571 2657
.0o,.0l
148114331
.
o1.01.0_ -1"
-
1427[ 853
809l
1" 1"
3491
;"
227[
;
599[ 557[
1491 101

THEOREM 11. Let

515
R and e(x) (log x) exp {-- (log x)/R}
(546- )
Then we have
(3.33) {1 (x)} x < O(x) (x) for 2 x,
(3.34) O(x) (x) < {1 + e(x)} x for 1 x.
An approximate value for R is
R 17.51631.
THEOREM 12. The quotient (x)/x takes its maximum at x 113, and
(.35) (x) < 1.03883 x for 0 < x.
1
THEOREM 13. The quotient {(x) O(x)}/x tales its maximum at
X 361, and
(3.36) (x) 0(x) < 1.42620 x1/2 forO <x.
THEOREM 14. We have
(3.37) 0.98 X 1]2 < (X) (X) for 121 __< x,
(3.38) b(x) 0(x) < 0(x1/2) + 3x 1/3 for 0
COROLLARY. We have
(3.39) b(x) O(x) < 1.02 x1/2 + 3x 3 forO < x.
Proof. Use Theorem 9.
THEOnEM 15. For 2 <_ n
(3.40) 1

-
1/(n- 1) __< n/(n);
72 J. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

also for 3 <= n

(3.41) n/4(n) < e c log log n -t- 5/(2 log log n)
except when
n- 2230 92870- 2.3.5.7.11.13.17.19.23
in which case
(3.42) n/4(n) < e c log log n + 2.50637/log log n.
In (3.40), equality is attained whenever n is a prime. Thus, by taking n
to be a large prime, we can make n/(n) arbitrarily close to unity. It is
shown in Landau [7], pp. 217-219, vol. 1, that for each positive e there are
an infinity of n’s for which
(e c- e)log log n < n/(n).
We do not know if there are an infinity of n’s for which
e c log log n <= n/4,(n).

4. Special approximations for limited ranges

THEOREM 16. We have
(4.1) li(x) li(x 1/2) < (x) for 11 _<_ x =< l0s,
(4.2) (x) < i(x) for 2 <= x <= l0
THEOREM 17. We have
(4.3) x -/li(x) (x)} log x < O(x) for e <= x <= l0
(4.4) (x) < x 2x + {r(x) 1/2
li(x) +li(xl/2)}logx fore l0 <= x <=
By use of Theorem 17 and the Rand table of primes [1], one can get quite
sharp estimates of 0(x) for e =< x =< l0s. However, it is usually adequate
to use the more convenient but less precise results below.
THEOREM 18. For 0 < x <_ l0
(4.5) x 2.05282 x 1/ < O(x) < x.
THEOREM 19. For 0 < x <= 1420.9 and for 1423 =< x __< l0
(4.6) x- 2 x 1/ < O(x).
The coefficient in (4.5) corrects a transposition of digits in Theorem 6 of
Rosser [12].
THEOREM 20. For 1 < x <-- l0
(4.7) log log x + B < p<= lip < log log x + B + 2/(x 1/ log x).
THEOREM 21. For 0 < x <_ l0
(4.8) logx + E < p__< (logp)/p < logx-t- E 2.06123/x1/.
 -
FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF :PRIME NUMBERS 73

THEOREM 22. For 0 < x < 113 and for 113.8 <__ x <= 10
(4.9) __< (log p)/p < log x + E 2Ix 1/2.
THEOREM 23. For 0 x <- l0
c
(4.10) e c log x < ]I_ P/(P 1) < e log x 2eC/x1/2.
THEOREM 24. We have
(4.11) x 1/ < (x) O(x) for 121 __< x __< 1016
1/2
(4.12) (x) O(X) < X -Jl- 3X 1/ for 0 < x <= 1016.
One immediately wonders if the results of Theorems 20-23 could be valid
for all x. It is known that each of (4.1), (4.2), and (4.5) fails infinitely
often for large x, and indeed each side of (4.5) fails infinitely often (see
Theorems 35 and 34 on pp. 103 nd 100 of Inghm [6]). Perhnps one cn
extend these results to show that ech of (4.7) through (4.10) fails for large
x; we hve not investigated the matter.
Theorem 18 gives sharp bounds for O(x) for 0 < x <__ 10 For larger s.
values of x, sharp bounds for O(x) can be obtained by use of Theorem 14 and
its corollary provided sharp bounds for k(x) are known. For 10 =< x =<
5000
e sharp bounds for k(x) can be obtained from our Table I, in which we
tabulate against b values of such that for e _<_ x
(-)x<(x) <(+)x.
The values of m listed pertain to the computations by which Table I was
established, all of which will be explained later.
Finally, Theorem 11 can be used to get close approximations to both (x)
and 0(x) for large x beyond the range of existing tables. Although Theorem
11 is valid for small values of x as well as large, for x below about e3 it gives
poorer estimates for 0(x) than can be obtained from Theorems 4, 9, 10, 18,
and 19. From e ls’4 to e4s, Theorem 11 gives poorer estimates than can be
obtained from Table I with the help of Theorem 14.
We can use our sharp estimates for 0(x) to get sharp estimates for other
functions depending on primes. Using the Stieltjes integral, we can write

E f(p)
_<_ f f(Y)
log y
dO(y).

An integration by parts gives

dy.
,_<_ logx \iog
Alternatively, one can derive (4.13) by use of Theorem A on p. 18 of Ingham
[6]. From (4.13), as in the derivation of (2.26), we get
f(y) dy 2f(2)
(4.14)
f(p)
__< f log y log 2

+ f(x) {()
log x
x} f {O(y) y}- \log
For suitable f, we can write (4.14) as
c f(y) dy
F_,
_<_
f(P) [
J2 log y + Lf

-
(4.15)
+ f(x) {O(x)
log x
x} lO(Y) (f(y)y) dy,
d
Y}- \log
where Lf is the constant given by
2f(2) c
(4.16) L/ / {O(y) y} \log/dy.
log 2 Jo.

From (4.13) we get

() c dy
log x +
(4.17) -(x) / y log y

(4.18)
i (x)
+ f* O(y)(1 -+- log y) dy,
_< p x log x y log y
5-’ log p O(x) f* (y) dy
x +
(4.19) p y.
p<__

From (4.15) we get

1
log logxq-B q-
() x
x log x
(4.20)
{0(y) y}(1 + log y) dy,
y log y

(4.21)
__<
log p
p
log x -t- E + O(x)x x
/i O(y)y y
dy.

to show this, we let x

-
To prove (4.20), it suffices to show that in this case L] log log 2 B;
in (4.15) and use Theorem 11 and the definition
of B. The proof of (4.21) is similar.
5. Tabular and computational results, and proofs
derived therefrom
The well-known table of primes, Lehmer [10], lists all primes less than 10
in such a fashion that one can easily obtain the corresponding value of
+
r(x) 1; since Lehmer takes unity to be the first prime, his count of primes
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 75

differs by unity from ours. Just recently the Rand Corporation has prepared
a list of primes, published on microcards in Baker and Gruenberger [1], giv-
ing all primes up to slightly beyond 108 Within the large range of these
tables, one can read off exact values of r(x) and p. Their count agrees with
Lehmer’s rather than ours.
By use of Lehmer’s Table, Rosser verified Theorem 16 and the right half
of (4.5) for x __< 106. An account of his methods is given in Rosser [12].
By the same methods, these results were extended to 107 in the first major
computation cited in Section 1.
We turn next to the calculations required to establish (2.10) through (2.14).
The values for c(1) and 1/c(1) given there were computed from (2.9) and
the known value of C. The values for B and c(2) given in (2.10) and (2.14)
have been taken from pp. 43 and 44 of Rosser [11]. At the end of the foot-
note on p. 43 of this reference, there is given a twenty-four-decimal value of
C B; this value corrects the slightly erroneous value of B C given in
Table I of Gram [5]. Incidentally, Gram reproduces M:errifield’s incorrect
value of ] p-3 in his Table I; a correct value is given on p. 249 of Davis [2].
To determine the remaining quantity, E, we use the relation
’(s)/(s) (log p)/(p8 1) rl (log
which is given near the bottom of p. 17 of Ingham [6]. From this we obtain
forn > 1
(5.1) (log p)/p’ Em=l (m) ’(mn)/(mn).
Substituting this into (2.8) gives
(5.2) E C
=
t(m) ’(m)/(m).
We first computed i"(n) by using an electronic computer to sum the first
500 terms of the series
"(n) ]= (log m)/m’;
the remainder of the series was computed by the Euler-Maclaurin sum
formula. As a cheek, this was repeated with the first 1000 terms. Using
the values of i’(n) given on p. 244 of Davis [2], values of
’(n)/(n) and ] (log p)/pn
were computed for 2 =< n -< 56 by using (5.1). These, together with the
values of -i"(n) are listed for 2 =< n =< 29 in Table IV. In this table the
values given for -’(n) are in error by less than 10-17. Division by (n)
could cause slightly greater errors in -’(n)/(n). As we used seventeen-
decimal values in (5.1), the errors in p-n log p could be a bit greater. For
n > 29, the three functions tabulated do not differ in the first seventeen
decimals, and each is given to better than seventeen decimals by
(log 2)/2 + (log 3)/3 n.
76 . BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

Using (2.8), we got the approximation

E -1.33258 22757 33220 87
which we checked by (5.2).
Incidentally, our values of -’(n)/(n) check the seven-decimal values
given in Walther [16].
With vMues for B, E, und e-c now estublished, other computations could be
undertaken. The second major computation cited in Section 1 was the
tabulation by Rosser and Walker of many functions of primes for x -< 16,000.
This verified Theorems 1-10 and their corollaries in this range, with the ex-
ception of Theorem 3, which was established for p _< 16,000. This computa-
tion also verified Theorems 18-23 for x -<_ 16,000.
The third major computation cited in Section 1 was the tabulation by Appel
s.
nd Rosser of mny functions of primes for x _-< 10 This established
s,
Theorems 16 and 18-23 for 313 _-< x __< 10 which completed their verifica-
tion. A discussion of this computation, together with prtial tabulation
and many more details can be found in a report written by Appel and Rosser
[19].
Theorem 17 is an immediate consequence of Theorem 16 as a result of
Lemmas 5 and 6 of Rosser [12]. Thus Theorems 16 through 23 are es-
tablished.
In Table II, at the end of this paper, we have listed values of t(x) and
other functions selected from the Rosser-Walker tabulation. If an isolated
value is desired in the range x -< 16,000, it can be readily computed by working
from the nearest entry in Table II; it can be checked by working from the
entry on the other side. If numerous random values are desired, it is probably
easier to generate an entire table on one of the modern very fast computers,
using the entries in Table II to check key values. Other values for comparison
are available in the report by Appel and Rosser [19].
For more limited ranges, one can derive values of some functions from
tables already in the literature. Thus in Glaisher [4] is given a seven-decimal
table of
f(x) II<=, (1 1/p)
and its common logarithm for 2 _<_ x -< 10,000. By comparison with the
Rosser-Walker tabulation, we verified that the Glaisher table is quite reliable.
Round-off errors are common in the function values, but we found only four
cases where the listed function value is in error by more than one unit in the
last place. The correct values there are as follows"
f(4271) 0.0670040, f(9397) 0.0613076,
f(8609) 0.0619246, f(9883) 0.0609460.
In all these cases, the logarithmic values given were accurate to within round-
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF :PRIME NUMBERS 77
off errors. The last column of our Table II gives selected values of 1/f(x)
to ten decimals.
In Gram [5] is given an eight-decimal table of (x) for x =< 2000. The
eighth decimal is quite unreliable, but no entry is in error by as much as
10-7. From this, one can readily compute values of 0(x) for x =< 2000 by
using our Table III, which gives the values of (x) 0(x) for x < 50,653.
The arguments x are those prime powers pr having r >= 2, so that the tabulated
function is constant between entries. By means of Table III one can also
compute (x) from the values of 0(x) given in Table II up to x 16,000.
We now turn to Theorems 12-14, 24. We first take note of the following
result from pp. 90-91 of Landau [7], vol. 1, proved by adapting the elementary
derivation of Tchebichef [14].

-
THEOREM 25. For 1 <- x
(5.3) (x) -< (x) < 1.2 ax + (3 log x + 5)(log x + 1),
where a denotes the constant
v log 2 + log 3 + log 5 0.92129 ...,
according to the definition on p. 88 of Landau [7], vol. 1.
Using (5.3) with Theorem 18 gives the following weakened form of Theorem
9"
(5.4) (x) < 1.11 x for 0 < x.
Using values of O(x 1/2) from the Rosser-Walker computation, we verified
(3.38) for x < 50,653 by using Table III. For 50,653 -<_ x < 1024, one can
verify (3.38) by (2.24) and the right side of (4.5) to do this, we proceed by
cases such as 2 __< x < 2 N where M and N are conveniently chosen integers.

-
Finally, for 1024 <__ x, (3.38) holds by (2.24) and (5.4). Thus (3.38) has
been completely established. From it, by (5.4) one can infer the following
weakened form of (3.39)"
(5.5) (x) (x) < 1.11 x /2 3x / for 0 < x.
As (3.38) and the right side of (4.5) imply (4.12), we cn complete the
proof of Theorem 24 by establishing (4.11). This is readily done for 121 _<_
x < 50,653 by means of Table III. By using Theorems 18 and 19 with (2.24),
we can finish the proof of (4.11) nd hence of Theorem 24.
By comparison with Gram’s Table [5] of (x), Theorem 12 was verified
for x =<2000, nd it ws ascertained that in this rnge the maximum value
of (x)/x lies between 1.03882 and 1.03883. Thus one can complete the
proof of Theorem 12 by proving that (x) _<_ 1.03882 x for 2000 x. This =<
follows for x < 50,653 by Theorem 18 and Table III. For 50,653 -< x _-< 10
it follows by Theorem 18 nd (4.12). It will follow for 11 greter x by Table
78 ,1. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCttOENFELD

I as soon as we have justified the values in this table, which we will do in the
next section.
We can verify Theorem 13 in the range 0 < x < 50,653 by reference to
Table III. It then suffices to verify b(x) (x) -<_ 1.42619 x 1/ for 50,653 __<
x. For 106 _<_ x, we infer this by (5.5). For x < 106 we use (2.25); the
facts that h(Y) 0 for y 2 and that is monotone let us conclude
(x) (x) ()

s.
+ () + (x) (x)
+ (x") (x") + (x) + (x")

1/2 1/3 /5

since (3.35) holds for x _<_ 10 This suffices to complete the proof.
-
/(X TM) /(X 1/15) + ](X 1/17) /(X 1/19)
__< (x ") + x1/) + t(x") + (x ")
< 1.04 (x + x -t- x -t- x 1/1)
At this point, therefore, we have established (2.10) through (2.14), Theo-
rems 16 through 24, Theorem 12 except for 10 < x, Theorem 13, and (3.38)
of Theorem 14. We have also verified Theorems 1 through 10 and their
corollaries for x __< 16,000 or for pn <_- 16,000.
6. Sharpening of some results of Rosser, with application to
several proofs
In the preceding section, we carried our proofs as far as is practicable without
appealing to very deep results. From here on, we shall be mainly concerned
with invoking certain deep results to validate Table I and complete the proofs
of the results stated in Section 3. Space does not permit us to give proofs in
full, so that we shall assume that the reader is quite familiar with Ingham
[6] and Rosser [12], from which we shall use notation and results with a
minimum of reference.
The most significant sharpening of results from Rosser [12] arises from the
fact that it is now known that the first 25000 zeros of the zeta function have
real part equal to 1/2, as shown in Lehmer [8] and Lehmer [9]. This enables
us to replace the A on p. 223 of Rosser [12] by A e9"99. We do not now have

-
N(A) F(A), which will make a slight change in a key formula, as we note
below.
Observing that
322 W 546 cos -t- 329 cos 2 W 130 cos 3 25 cos 4
2(1 + cos ) (3 + 10 cos )2 >__ 0,
we can modify the proof of Theorem 20 of Rosser [12] to get a proof of
THEOREM 26. For A <- ,,
we have < 1 1/ R log /).
The R here is that defined in Theorem 11. In other places, as here, it re-
places the number 17.72 appearing in Rosser [12]. Thus, we are conforming
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 79

with the notation of Rosser [12] when we temporarily abrogate the usual
denotation of (n) and define
(6.1) (-y) (m, x, /) 5’
--m--I e-(logx) (Rlogs,)

-
However, for the purposes of the next theorem we consider (6.1) as de-
fining (,) for arbitrary positive R.
THEOREM 27. If (’y) is defined as in (6.1) with m and R positive numbers,
if 2 <= K, and if 0 <= log x __< (m 1 R log K, then
(6.2) (,) < 2R(K)(K) +Q (y) log Y dy,
where
1 0.137 log K 0.443
(6.3) Q -!- K log K log (K/2z)
Proceed as in the proof of Lemma 18 of Rosser [12].
COROLLARY. If in (6.1) we take R to be the R of Theorem 11, and if A <= K,
0 < m, and
(6.4) 0 _-< log x < 1748(m -4- 1),
then

(6.5)
’
Proof. As we
(,) < 2R(K)O(K) + 0.1592 O(y) log Y dy.
are here using the R of Theorem 11, (6.4) verifies the final
hypothesis of Theorem 27. In (6.5), the coefficient in front of the integral
is got by taking K e9’99 in (6.3), which is permissible since e
9"99
A =< K.
In Rosser [12], in the situation corresponding to taking K A in the corol-
lary, the coefficient 2 did not appear in the first term on the right of (6.5).
This is because N(A) F(A) in that paper. Except for that, we now pro-
ceed as in the proofs of Lemma 19 and Theorem 21 of Rosser [12] to derive
THEOREM 28. If m is a positive integer,
1 < k loga < m 1748
0.123’
mT1
0.0003647 1.298 m 0.1592 /+)

--.3 mAa, ll I
m}2
+
and1 + ma < a, then for a x
x(1-)-.s4<(x) <x(l+)-log(1-x-).
80 J. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

By taking a successively equal to e for the various values of b listed in

Table I, and using with these values the listed values of m, the values of e
listed in Table I were derived from Theorem 28. In particular, the value for
b 5000 was listed just as it was given by Theorem 28 despite the fact that
Theorem 28 gives a smaller e for b 4900, as listed in Table I. The bounds
used for kl, k2, and k3 are those given in Lemma 17 of Rosser [12]. Bounds
for larger m were obtained by the trivial inequality
14 E [/--m-- K I’’--m-1
Now that we have justified Table I, we use it to complete the proof of
Theorem 12, as noted above.
Turning to Theorem 9, we verify it for x =<
10 by Theorem 18. For
10 =< =<
x 1016, we have 0(x) < (x) x 1/ by Theorem 24, and so verify
Theorem 9 in this range by Table I. Above 1016, we use Table I with the
trivial inequality 0(x) < (x).
=<
We complete the verification of Theorem 10 for 16,000 -< x 10 by The-
orem 19. Above this, we use (5.5) with Table I.
<=
As far as it furnishes bounds on 0(x), we verify Theorem 11 for x 101 by
comparison with values of 0(x) taken from the Rosser-Walker tabulation.
>=
Now with e defined as in Theorem 11, we have e 0.625 for 2 x e9. =< =<
Thus we can complete the verification of Theorem 11 in this range by The-
orems 10 and 12. This puts us in the range of Table I. From here to e4s
we can proceed by using Table I with (5.5). We now complete the proof of
Theorem 11 as in the proof of Theorem 22 of Rosser [12], noting that by (5.5)
the difference between 0(x) and (x) is so small as to be more than allowed
for by the fact that various quantities do not actually attain the upper bounds
by which they are replaced in the proof.
We verify (3.37) for x -< 1016 by Theorem 24. For greater x, it follows by
(2.24) and Theorem 10. Thus we have completed the proof of Theorem 14.
For some of our later proofs we will need results that are sharper in certain
ranges than Theorem 4. We now state and prove several such results.
THEOREM 29 For 1451 < x < e375
(6.6) x(1 0.3) < O(x) <x (1-t--log.0.!_
log
THEOREM 30. For 809 < x < e57
(6.7) x 1
( 1] <0(x) <x (1-4-1ogx].
THEOREM 31. For 569 =< x,
(6.8) x
<1 1-/ <0(x) <x (1A-logx].
For x _<_ 16,000, these are established by means of the Rosser-Walker tabu-
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 81

lation. For 16,000 -<- x _<_ 108, these are established by Theorems 18 and 19.
For 108 < x < 1016 we use Theorem 24 and Table I. For 1016 < x < e5
we use the corollary of Theorem 14 and Table I. Finally, above e5 we use
Theorem 11.
From these, Theorem 4 is an easy consequence.
7. Proof of Theorems 1 through 3
We start with five lemmas. As their proofs are similar, we state all five
lemmas first before giving the proofs. We first make the definition

(7.1)
J(x,a) r(1451) 0(1451)
og 5 og
x
( + og
f(1-[-loYa)dyy"
-i- log
LEMMA 1. For e -<- x,
(7.2) li(x) x(1-k 21ogx
<logx
LEMMA 2. ForlOs-<- xanda 0.31,

(7.a)
L
L 4. Fore
. z,
J(z, a) <
lo
For e N z and a 0.47, he ineqalig (7.) i vlid.
lo

(7.4)
L
(7.5)
. z/(log z ) < li(z)
ForlO N zaed -0.47,
x/(log x ) < J(x, a).
li(zn).

For each of these lemmas, the proof is in two parts. First, one verifies
that in the stated range of x, the derivative of the left side is less than that
of the right side. Second, one verifies that at the lower limit of x the left
side is less than the right side. To perform the needed calculations, one can
use the reduction formula

(7.6) log
a dy
+1 y
b
log b
x
log x t- f dy
log Y
to express the various integrals in terms of li(x) and elementary functions.
For x <- e 1, one can get numerical values of li(x) from the tables of El(y)
given in [18]. Outside this range, one can appeal to the following result.
THEOREM 32. If m is a positive integer and m <= y <= m + 1, then

(7.7) 2_ ’ 1.06 -I- e E j y

1)
3 m =1
 .

-
82 BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

and
1/2
(7.8) 2(m+ )2
1
1.06
m+ 1
e
(j- 1)
y
are lower and upper bounds respectively for Ei (y).
This is a consequence of equations (58), (68), and (69), and of Lemma 3
and Theorem 7 of Rosser [13].
We note the value (1451) 230 and the approximation 0(1451) 1396.4
taken from the Rosser-Walker tabulation.
We now turn to (3.2), which has already been established for x N 16,000
by the Rosser-Walker tabulation. By Lemma 1 and Theorem 16, we verify
s.
(3.2) up to x 10 We have by (4.17) that
(x) (1451)- (1451)
log 1451 + 0()
log x +
By Theorem 29, we can conclude v(x) < J(x, 0.31) if 1451 x e
by Lemma 2 we can infer (3.2) for l0 x e
bine Lemma 3 and Theorem 31 to complete the proof of (3.2).
. So
In a similar way we com-
dy
y log y
.
In a similar way, we combine Lemma 4 and Theorem 16 to verify (3.3) for
x s,
10 and complete the verification by combining Lemmu 5 nd Theorem
31.
We get (3.1) from (3.3), and (3.4) from (3.2), by applying the inequality
x
logx (1+ ) <logx-a
logx
a x
forea<x
in the two cases a and a .
As preliminaries for the proof of Theorem 3 we undertake the proof of (3.12)
and
(7.9) pn < n(log n -t- 2 log log n) for 4 -< n.
These were proved in Rosser [11], but can be derived so readily from the strong
results now available that it seems worthwhile to indicate new proofs by this
method. For instance, suppose if possible that pn <- n log n. Then
n -< r(n log n).
So by (3.2), we have
n < log n nlogn
-t- log log n (1
log n -t- log log n 1.5)
a result which certainly fails if e __< n. So (3.12) holds for e =< n, and a
trivial computation verifies it for smaller n. The proof of (7.9) is analogous.
From these, we can now infer Lemmas 9 and 10 of Rosser [12], using the
proofs given there. Using Lemma 9 of Rosser [12] with Theorem 18 gives
nlogn-nloglogn- n- li(n)
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 83

for 5 <= n -< r(10s). Then (3.10) follows for e -< n -< r(10 s) by Lemma 7
of Rosser [12]. Now use Lemma 9 of Rosser [12] with Theorem 30, and infer
o. o
nlogn+nloglogn--n--li(n) < p 1 ( +logp,]
for 140 _<_ n __< e s. As li(n) < 0.1 n for r(10s) =< n, by Lemma 7 of Rosser
[12], and
(7.10) pn/(log p,) < n
by (3.5), we infer (3.10) for n =< e s.
We use Theorem 31 in a similar manner
to complete the proof of (3.10).
We next prove (3.11). We note first of all that it has been verified for
n -<_ 1862 by the Rosser-Walker tabulution. Now let 1862 <- n, and suppose
that (3.11) has been verified for all integers less than n. Then the hypothesis
of Lemma 10 of Rosser [12] is verified, and we conclude that
n log log n
(7.11) log n + n log log n n -}-
log n
By Theorem 19, if n =< 7r(10s), then
n log log n
p,- 2(p,) :/ < n log n -t-n log log n- n log n
By (7.9),
2(p,) 1/2 < 2(n log n + 2n log log n) < 0.2 n,1/2

so that (3.tl) is verified. Now let r(10s) <= n -< e369. Then (7.11) and
Theorem 29 give

(
p= I o.31
1- =] < n log n -f- n log log n n -4-
n log log n
log n
Using (7.10), we again infer (3.11 ). In a similar way, we can use Theorem
31 to verify (3.11) for e69 _<_ n.

LMMX 6. For1 <= x and A

K(1, x) <

(8.1)
0.0463
X1]2

Taking m
8. Proof of Theorems 5 through 8
We require several lemmas.

2R(K)
-t- K -{- 0.1592

1
1
<= K,
i

x in (6.5) gives
2R (K)
K2 -t-0.1592
+ log (K/2r)
K

1 -b log (K/2’)
_ e-9.61 X--l/(logK).

K< 2< g
84 J. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

Taking K A in this gives

1 -9.61
(s.2)
By Lemmas 16 and 17 of Rosser [12]

< X 1/2
+ A<7EK + Z:

LEMMA 8. For 1 < x,

(y- (y)) (1 -l-logy)
y dy
log y
y2
0.0463

Our lemma now follows by use of (8.1) and (8.2).

more difficult one, namely that for Lemma 8.

LEMMA 7. For 1 < x,
y (y) dy
< K 1, x) -t-

2
x-1/ 11:)

We next state two lemmas whose proofs are so similar that we give only the

-t- log x
log x
(K(1
\
_
1.84 0.31
__x
1

x) + 1.8_4 + 0.31
x x ]
Proof. We have
yp-2 (1 q- log y) dy XP--1
log y (p 1) log x (p-- 1) 2,log2x
2
log ayd
Now
x- f y- dy x- y-2

-
< -1-2
logx
2
J logay logx log ady
,/--1

So
log x "-I- 2x f dy
y log log x

[ yp-2 (1 + log y) dy

-
1
Jx log y
2-+-logx x
log z 7
Hence
(s.a) log y)
y
dy <2+ log x
log x
K(1, x).
So by Theorem 29 on p. 77 of Ingham [6], we have
(y (y)) (1 + log y) dy 2 + log x K(1, x) -f- I,
y2 log. y log x
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 85

where
(2 log2r--log(1--y-2)) (1.logy)
1
f 2y log y
dy

12q-log21gxx f= lOgy (1 y-) dy

2 log 2r

q- log 2 log 2r
1
log 2 \ x + (x--2r--11)j
x
x rl r

2-}-log{!Ogx2rx q- r=l 2r(2r -I-

1
log
x
1

<2 q-loglg<lgx2rx -t-1-’x31g2}

x

From this, the lemma follows.

LEMMA 9. For 0 <= a < n,

-
n log y
ya--n--1 1 dy <
n x
log2y n--a logx"
Proof. We have
1 q- n 10g y d y-’
Y
a--n--1
log y
dy ya lo
dy
x
log x -l-
a
foo ya--n--1
log y
dy

< x a
ya-n-1 dy
logx log

-
n x
n a log x
Let us define
L(x) 2q-logx
og x K(1 x) q-1"84q- 0.31
(8.4)
1.02
+ 2.04
x- + 4.5 x-2 + x--l’
(8.15) M(z, a) (log x) log 1 q-
2 log z log x"
LEMMt 10. If1 < A <= B and a < 1/2 nd

and L(A < M(B, a), then L(x) < M(x, a) for A <- x <- B.
Proof. We readily verify that for A __< x both L(x) and M(x, a) are de-
creasing functions of x. So for A -< x _<_ B
86 $. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCttOENFELD

L(x) <= L(A) < M(B, a) <-M(x, a).

LEMMA 11. For l0 < x < e 6
(8.7) L(x) < M(x, 0.31).
Proof. By (8.4) and (8.5) and by taking K in Lemma 6, we find
that
L(10s) <3X 10-4 < M(e 6, 0.31).
So we can use Lemma 10 with A 108, B e 6.
LEMMA 12. For e75 <-- x,
(8.8) L(x) < M(x, 0.47).
25
Proof. By taking K e in Lemma 6, we find that
K(1, x) < 0.0463/x 1/2 e-9"61 x-1/(5R) 10-1.
From this, we readily verify by (8.4) and (8.5) that
L(e5) < 2.9 X 10-5 < M(e 1, 0.47),
L(e1) < 7 X 10-6 < M(e4, 0.47),
L (e4) < 9 X 10-9 < M(e 0.47). ,
Then by three applications of Lemma 10, we verify (8.8) for en __< x __< e a.
Finally for ea __< x, we take
log x
K exp
R(log log x log 400)
and observe that
L(x) < 0.028/log x < M(x, 0.47)
by (8.4), Lemma 6, and (8.5).
LEMMA 13. For l0 _<_ x,

- - )
1 1 1.02
(8.9) _-_ log log x B log 1W21ogx
P (x- 1) logx"
Proof. By (4.20), Lemma 8, and (3.39), we have
1
log log x- B

<_
I’(x) -x
x log x + (y- (y)) (1 -t-log y)
yS logs y
dy

+ f ((y) --O(y)) (1 -{- log y) dy

yS log y
o(x) x 2 + log (K(1 x) -I-
1"84
-i-
x log x log x --]
(1.02 y -t- 3Y/a)(1 -t- log y)
+ yS logs y
dy.
 -
FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 87

We apply Lemma 9 with n 1, once with a 1/2 and once with a 1/2. Then,
with the help of (8.4), the above inequality reduces to

log logx-- B <

(x) x q_L(x) 1.02
x log x log x (x 1) log x"
375
From this the lemma follows; we first assume 108 <__ x __< e and use Theorem
29, Lemma 11, and (8.5), and we then assume e375 _<_ x and use Theorem 31,
Lemma 12, and (8.5).
We now proceed to the proof of Theorem 5. It was proved for x _<_ 16,000
by the Rosser-Walker tabulation. For 16,000 _<_ x _<_ 10 s, it follows from
Theorem 20. Finally, for 10 <= x, it follows by Lemma 13.
The proof of Theorem 6 proceeds similarly. For 10 _<_ x, it depends on a
lemma analogous to Lemma 13 that uses Lemma 7 rather than Lemma 8.
The entire proof parallels that of Theorem 5 so closely that we omit the details.
For x <- 16,000, Theorem 7 and Theorem 8 follow from the Rosser-Walker
s,
tabulation, and for 16,000 _<_ x __< l0 they follow by Theorem 23. So let us
assume that 108 _<_ x. We apply Lemma 13 in the form that the left side of
(8.9) with the absolute value bars removed is greater than the negative of
the right side. In this, we substitute for B from (2.7) and take the exponential
of both sides. We get"

(8.10) e
log x 1+ 2 log x > --))exp((x-- 1) .02
logx
/

where

Takingf(x) x in (4.13), we infer if n > 1

(x) o(y)
-t- f
5-1 1 -nlogy
dy.
p x log x J y+l log2y
Then by Theorem 9 and Lemma 9
1 y_ 1 n log y
< 1.02
log y
dy
< P
1.02n x 1- 1.02n
n-- 1 logx- x -logx
So
S > =. x
-
1.02
log x (x
1.02
1) log x
So by (8.10) we conclude that (3.26) holds. Inverting both sides gives (3.28).
Similarly, if we remove the absolute value bars on the left side of (8.9) and
take the exponential of both sides, we infer (3.29). Inverting both sides
gives (3.25).
88 ft. BARKLEY ROSSEI AND LOWELL SCttOENFELD

9. Proof of Theorem 15
In this section, (n) again denotes the Euler totient function.
LEMMA 14. If m and n are positive integers, and n < exp 0(p+), then
{9.1) hie(n) p/(p 1).
Proof. Let q, q, q be the distinct primes, in increasing order, which
divide n. Then
exp (p+) > n q q p... p exp (Pr).
So r m. Consequently
n/(n) := q/(q- 1) := p/(p- 1) p/(p.- 1),
which is the sme as (9.1)
By means of Lemm 14 we can verify (3.41) numerically for succession
of intervMs if log n is not gret. For instance, we readily verify numericMly
that
p/(p 4.375 < e c log log 210 +
5/(2 log log 210).
So we cn tke m 4 in Lemm 14, nd conclude that if 210 n < 2310
exp 0(p+), then
c
n/(n) < e c log log 210 + 5/(2 log log 210) e log log n 5/(2 log log n)
With the help of vMues of 0(x) nd of

taken from the Rosser-Walker tabulation, we proceeded in a step-by-step

manner as indicated above, verifying (3.41) for 3 n < exp 0(313) except
at
n p23 P
t which point (3.42) holds. As 294 < 0(313), this verifies Theorem 15 for
n E e294.
THEOREM 33. UX 5 and n < exp O(x), then
(9.2) n/(n) H,- P/(P- 1).
Proof. Choose m so that p+ x < p+. Then n < exp0(x)
exp (p+). Also 5 p+, else we would have p+ 5, contradicting
5 x < p+. Sop p+- 2 x- 2. Now use Lemm14.
LEMMA 15. Let n be an integer greater than unity and y a real number such
that 288 log n + y and log n < 0(log n + y), and
0 y- 2 (0.9 logn)/loglogn.
Then (3.41) holds for this value of n.
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 89

By (3.29) and Theorem 33

e--Cn 0.5
<log(logn +y-- 2)
(n) log (log n -t- y 2)
< log log n "-t- log ( 1
log :) log log n
< log log n --1 y
log n
2
+ log0.5log n
_<_ log log n -+- log 1.4log n
From this, (3.41) follows.
To complete the proof of Theorem 15, we hve to show that (3.41) holds
for 294 _<_ log n. In fact from Lemm 15, one can deduce (3.41) for 255 __<
logn. First assume 255 __< logn =< 1340. Takeytobe
2 -t- 2( 1 + log n) /.
Then wehve288 < logn+y < 1420. Also
log n (log n + y) 2(log n -k- y)1/2,
so that log n < 0(log n + y) by Theorem 19. As we easily verify that
0 <- y 2 -< (0.9 log n)/log log n, we infer (3.41) by Lemma 15. Finally,
let 1340 _<_ log n. Take y (0.9 log n)/log log n. Then
log n <
O(log n -t- y)
holds by (3.14), and the other hypotheses of Lemma 15 are readily verified,
giving (3.41) again.
90 $. B&RKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

TABLE I
(1- e) x <(x) < (1 + e) xforeb_ x
b m lO’e n b m lO’e n b m lO’e n

18.4 1 1.6327 2 62 4 1.3108 3 725 5 5.9384 4

18.5 1 1.6295 2 64 4 1.2825 3 750 5 5.8017 4
18.6 2 1.6256 2 66 4 1.2696 3 775 5 5.6682 4
18.7 2 1.5987 2 68 4 1.2630 3 800 5 5.5378 4
18.8 2 1.5722 2 70 4 1.2588 3 825 5 5.4103 4
18.9 2 1.5462 2 72 4 1.2555 3 850 4 5.2843 4
19.0 2 1.5206 2 74 5 1.2138 3 875 4 5.1397 4
19.5 2 1.3993 2 76 5 1.1419 3 900 4 4.9991 4
20.0 2 1.2880 2 78 5 1.1074 3 925 4 4.8624 4
20.5 2 1.1861 2 80 5 1.0920 3 950 4 4.7294 4
21 2 1.0928 2 85 5 1.0793 3 975 4 4.6001 4
22 2 9.2933 3 90 5 1.0737 3 1000 4 4.4744 4
23 2 7.9327 3 95 6 1.0075 3 1050 4 4.2331 4
24 2 6.8090 3 100 6 9.9653 4 1100 4 4.0049 4
25 2 5.8927 3 105 6 9.9194 4 1150 3 3.7703 4
26 2 5.1592 3 110 6 9.8791 4 1200 3 3.5217 4
27 2 4.5870 3 125 6 9.7608 4 1300 3 3.0730 4
28 2 4.1548 3 150 6 9.5669 4 1400 3 2.6819 4
29 2 3.8400 3 175 6 9.3768 4 1500 3 2.3411 4
30 2 3.6192 3 200 6 9.1904 4 1600 2 2.0120 4
31 2 3.4690 3 225 6 9.0078 4 1800 2 1.4334 4
32 2 3.3691 3 250 6 8.8289 4 2000 2 1.0274 4
33 2 3.3034 3 275 6 8.6535 4 2200 2 7.4229 5
34 2 3.2601 3 300 6 8.4816 4 2400 2 5.4246 5
35 2 3.2310 3 325 6 8.3131 4 2600 2 4.0328 5
36 2 3.2110 3 350 6 8.1480 4 2800 2 3.0861 5
37 2 3.1964 3 375 6 7.9861 4 3000 2 2.5073 5
38 2 3.1853 3 400 6 7.8275 4 3200 3 2.4309 5
39 3 2.9365 3 425 6 7.6721 4 3400 3 1.8801 5
40 3 2.6399 3 450 6 7.5197 4 3600 3 1.4596 5
42 3 2.2000 3 475 6 7.3704 4 3800 3 1.1388 5
44 3 1.9387 3 500 6 7.2240 4 4000 3 8.9428 6
46 3 1.8064 3 525 6 7.0806 4 4200 3 7.0899 6
48 3 1.7467 3 550 6 6.9400 4 4400 3 5.7041 6
50 3 1.7202 3 575 6 6.8023 4 4500 3 5.1602 6
52 3 1.7072 3 600 6 6.6672 4 4600 3 4.7095 6
54 3 1.6994 3 625 5 6.5182 4 4700 3 4.3563 6
56 3 1.6936 3 650 5 6.3682 4 4800 3 4.1232 6
58 4 1.5013 3 675 5 6.2216 4 4900 3 4.0977 6
60 4 1.3740 3 700 5 6.0783 4 5000 3 4.9163 6
 500
1000
1500
(x)

474.55444 41547
956.24526 51201
1462.14165 18014
TABLE II

p_ P
_1

2.09670 95528
2.19808 01272
2.25562 82528
_
FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS

log p
P
4.94448 99600
5.60951 04754
6.01869 61634
91

11.15950 15857
12.35097 56739
13.08291 09945
2000 1939.83920 03026 2.29244 84920 6.29327 07024 13.57375 00182
2500 2433.60275 29800 2.32105 31990 6.51384 37141 13.96771 93817
3000 2932.35921 18787 2.34404 93716 6.69584 35999 14.29270 53203
3500 3409.45718 45205 2.36222 13278 6.84275 32932 14.55484 67736
4000 3911.14539 95812 2.37858 30199 6.97729 51026 14.79498 00928
4500 4412.18831 05019 2.39276 53465 7.09571 03205 15.00632 74987
50O0 4911.69535 17069 2.40518 86577 7.20087 63227 15.19393 85100
5500 5391.37223 83531 2.41586 31315 7.29230 15305 15.35701 01674
6000 5893.29745 72481 2.42598 40781 7.37988 11065 15.51324 05518
6500 6408.90736 71752 2.43543 75880 7.46249 21364 15.66060 23831
7000 6920.42102 99437 2.44401 57706 7.53814 09953 15.79552 97610
7500 7364.85741 60237 2.45091 39779 7.59945 43711 15.90487 48550
80OO 7875.15038 47974 2.45829 17384 7.66550 12982 16.02265 87938
85OO 8343.99966 34035 2.46460 59355 7.72243 05072 16.12415 52820
9O00 8870.37499 26578 2.47124 44465 7.78267 62189 16.23155 79133
9500 9418.36877 33985 2.47772 62760 7.84187 45368 16.33711 55421
10000 9895.99137 91570 2.48305 99472 7.89086 36043 16.42448 96322
1O5O0 10403.90704 75207 2.48842 73950 7.94043 00603 16.51288 85620
11000 10877.34163 04695 2.49317 02420 7.98445 72244 16.59139 63457
11500 11362.43971 33403 2.49778 96786 8.02755 03003 16.66821 99665
12000 11840.48575 38722 2.50212 24249 8.06816 24606 16.74059 88963
12500 12348.83694 44657 2.50652 81281 8.10963 67280 16.81451 87368
13000 12868.72809 74239 2.51084 52555 8.15044 40734 16.88726 89363
13500 13371.76845 32826 2.51484 72175 8.18842 74850 16.95498 91186
14000 13867.29252 76925 2.51862 72664 8.22444 83834 17.01920 34304
14500 14307.28400 32521 2.52185 38317 .8.25531 02383 17.07420 76210
15000 14844.79169 21653 2.52565 30642 8.29177 62756 17.13920 20969
155OO 15384.23856 36932 2.52932 29775 8.32712 81756 17.20221 91093
16000 15886.79246 84213 2.53262 50069 8.35904 03921 17.25911 70367
92 ;. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

TABLE III
(.) () (n)

4 0.69314 71805 59945 5041 90.52702 04080 85442

8 1.38629 43611 19891 5329 94.81747 98492 33834
9 2.48490 66497 88000 6241 99.18692 77017 00855
16 3.17805 38303 47946 6561 100.28553 99903 68965
25 4.78749 17427 82046 6859 103.22997 89695 35405
27 5.88610 40314 50156 6889 107.64881 95773 32003
32 6.57925 12120 10101 7921 112.13745 59470 64143
49 8.52516 13610 65414 8192 112.83060 31276 24088
64 9.21830 85416 25360 9409 117.40531 41061 27471
81 10.31692 08302 93469 10201 122.02043 46229 68731
121 12.71481 61030 91840 10609 126.65516 36111 98366
125 14.32425 40155 25940 11449 131.32799 24456 60272
128 15.01740 11960 85886 11881 136.01934 03278 89416
169 17.58235 05535 47422 12167 139.15483 45438 18566
243 18.68096 28422 15532 12769 143.88222 23625 30906
256 19.37411 00227 75477 14641 146.28011 76353 29277
289 22.20732 33668 31693 15625 147.88955 55477 63377
343 24.15323 35158 87O07 16129 152.73374 26342 21969
361 27.09767 24950 53447 16384 153.42688 98147 81914
512 27.79081 96756 13392 16807 155.37279 99638 37227
529 30.92631 38915 42542 17161 160.24799 72870 38379
625 32.53575 18039 76642 18769 165.16797 82128 66504
729 33.63436 40926 44752 19321 170.10245 21459 97195
841 37.00165 99226 31226 19683 171.20106 44346 65305
961 40.43564 71271 16372 22201 176.20501 07406 10764
1024 41.12879 43076 76318 22801 181.22229 05774 25689
1331 43.52668 95804 74688 24389 184.58958 64074 12163
1369 47.13760 74931 18913 24649 189.64583 22127 60471
1681 50.85117 95598 23221 26569 194.73958 24135 67233
1849 54.61237 96755 16783 27889 199.85757 62259 83988
2048 55.30552 68560 76728 28561 202.42252 55834 45525
2187 56.40413 91447 44838 29791 205.85651 27879 30671
2197 58.96908 85022 06375 29929 211.00980 43824 28450
2209 62.81923 61039 16433 32041 216.19719 01882 69205
2401 64.76514 62529 71747 32761 221.39568 72195 35031
2809 68.73543 81665 23868 32768 222.08883 44000 94976
3125 70.34487 60789 57969 36481 227.34110 78281 41606
3481 74.42241 35228 63688 37249 232.60379 80170 46492
3721 78.53328 73870 37000 38809 237.88700 17457 84480
4096 79.22643 45675 96945 39601 243.18030 657O5 08972
4489 83.43112 71869 87911 44521 248.53216 47039 85039
4913 86.26434 05310 44127 49729 253.93933 64754 45158
 FORMULAS FOR SOME FUNCTIONS OF PRIME NUMBERS 93

TABLE IV
V() V()/’() log p

2 0.93754 82543 15843 75 0.56996 09930 94532 80 0.49309 11093 68764 43

3 0.19812 62428 85636 85 0.16482 26821 58277 24 0.15075 75555 43950 43
4 6891 12658 96125 38 6366 97649 55371 13 6060 76333 50770 08
5 2857 37805 09462 95 2755 61921 91530 47 2683 86012 76798 36
6 1285 21651 31795 72 1263 30690 32511 06 1245 90807 22800 O0
7 603 35169 60875 64 598 35585 70638 40 594 06890 39148 20
8 290 19525 53710 67 289 01683 08046 75 287 95247 08729 24
9 141 59822 27241 81 141 31440 78811 70 141 04919 21424 53
10 69 70330 08171 39 69 63404 45284 02 69 56784 47344 62
11 34 50222 22368 36 34 48518 00538 42 34 46864 25630 50
12 17 13828 45854 35 17 13406 81216 67 17 12993 52446 21
13 8 53239 08655 93 8 53134 39558 17 8 53031 09167 11
14 4 25414 93381 78 4 25388 87954 23 4 25363 05574 13
15 2 12310 85533 00 2 12304 36131 40 2 12297 90562 75
16 1 06024 42032 51 1 06022 80005 72 1 06021 18616 76
17 52968 83357 53 52968 42904 49 52968 02557 64
18 26470 02978 82 26469 92874 47 26469 82787 80
19 13230 23694 78 13230 21170 17 13230 18648 51
20 6613 53020 74 6613 52389 83 6613 51759 42
21 3306 23676 77 3306 23519 08 3306 23361 48
22 1652 94254 16 1652 94214 75 1652 94175 35
23 826 41272 38 826 41262 53 826 41252 68
24 413 18686 29 413 18683 83 413 18681 37
25 206 58693 60 206 58692 98 206 58692 36
26 103 29130 38 103 29130 23 103 29130 08
27 51 64493 08 51 64493 04 51 64493 O0
28 25 82222 51 25 82222 50 25 82222 49
29 12 91103 25 12 91103 24 12 91103 24
94 J. BARKLEY ROSSER AND LOWELL SCHOENFELD

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. C. L. BAKER AND :F. J. GRUENBERGER, The first six million prime numbers, Microcard
Foundation, West Salem, Wisconsin, 1959.
2. H. T. DAWS, Tables of the higher mathematical functions, Vol. II, Bloomington,
Indiana, The Principia Press, Inc., 1935.
3. P.
yon

4. J. W. L. GLAISHER, Table of the values of 1/2.. ..

FINSLER, ]ber die Primzahlen zwischen n und 2n, Festschrift zum 60. Geburtstag
Prof. Dr. Andreas Speiser, Ziirich, Orell-Fiissli, 1945, pp. 118-122.

x
the denominators being the
series of prime numbers, Messenger of Mathematics, vol. 28 (1898), pp. 1-17.
5. J. P. GRAM, Undersgelser angaaende Maengden af Primtal under en given Graense,
K. Danske Vidensk. Selskabs Skrifter, Naturv. og Math. Afd., ser. 6, vol. 2
(1881-86), pp. 183-308.
6. A. E. INGHAM, The distribution of prime numbers, Cambridge Tract No. 30, Cam-
bridge University Press, 1932.
7. E. LANDAU, Handbuch der Lehre yon der Verteilung der Primzahlen, 2 vols., Leipzig,
Teubner, 1909. Reprinted in 1953 by Chelsea Publishing Co., New York.
8. D.H. LEHMER, On the roots of the Riemann zeta-function, Acta Math., vol. 95 (1956),
pp. 291-298.
9. , Extended computation of the Riemann zeta-function, Mathematika, vol. 3
(1956), pp. 102-108.
10. D. N. LEHMER, List of prime numbers from 1 to 10,006,721, Carnegie Institution of
Washington, Publication No. 165, 1914.
11. BARKLEY ROSSER, The n-th prime is greater than n log n, Proc Lond. Math. Soc. (2),
vol. 45 (1939), pp. 21-44.
12. --, Explicit bounds for some functions of prime numbers, Amer. J. Math., vol. 63
(1941), pp. 211-232.
13. J. BARKLEY ROSSER, Explicit remainder terms for some asymptotic series, Journal of
Rational Mechanics and Analysis (J. Math. Mech.), vol. 4 (1955), pp. 595-626.
14. P. TCHEBCHEF, M$moire sur les nombres premiers, J. Math. Pures Appl. (1), vol. 17
(1852), pp. 366-390.
15. E. TROST, Primzahlen, Basel, Birkhiuser, 1953.
16. A. WALTHER, Anschauliches zur Riemannschen Zetafunktion, Acta Math., vol. 48
(1926), pp. 393-400.
17. I. M. VINOGRADOV, Novaya ocenka funkcii (1 it), Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser.
Mat., vol. 22 (1958), pp. 161-164.
18. Tables of sine, cosine and exponential integrals, 2 vols., W.P.A. Tables prepared in
1940 under the sponsorship of the National Bureau of Standards.
19. KENNETH I. APPEL AND J. BARKLEY ROSSER, Table for estimating functions of primes,
IDA-CRD Technical Report Number 4, September, 1961 (available on request
from Communications Research Division, Institute for Defense Analyses,
yon Neumann Hall, Princeton, New Jersey).

INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSES

PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY
PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY PARK, PENNSYLVANIA