abc conjecture

The abc conjecture (also known as the Oesterlé–Masser conjecture) is a conjecture in number theory, first proposed by Joseph Oesterlé (1988) and David Masser (1985). It is stated in terms of three positive integers, a, b and c (hence the name) that are relatively prime and satisfy a + b = c. If d denotes the product of the distinct prime factors of abc, the conjecture essentially states that d is usually not much smaller than c. In other words: if a and b are composed from large powers of primes, then c is usually not divisible by large powers of primes. A number of famous conjectures and theorems in number theory would follow immediately from the abc conjecture or its versions. Goldfeld (1996) described the abc conjecture as "the most important unsolved problem in Diophantine analysis".

abc conjecture

Field	Number theory
Conjectured by	Joseph Oesterlé David Masser
Conjectured in	1985
Equivalent to	Modified Szpiro conjecture
Consequences	Beal conjecture Erdős–Ulam problem Faltings's theorem Fermat's Last Theorem Fermat–Catalan conjecture Roth's theorem Tijdeman's theorem

French mathematician Joseph Oesterlé

British mathematician David Masser

The abc conjecture originated as the outcome of attempts by Oesterlé and Masser to understand the Szpiro conjecture about elliptic curves,[1] which involves more geometric structures in its statement than the abc conjecture. The abc conjecture was shown to be equivalent to the modified Szpiro's conjecture.[2]

Various attempts to prove the abc conjecture have been made, but none are currently accepted by the mainstream mathematical community and as of 2020, the conjecture is still largely regarded as unproven.[3][4]

Formulations

Before we state the conjecture we introduce the notion of the radical of an integer: for a positive integer n, the radical of n, denoted rad(n), is the product of the distinct prime factors of n. For example

rad(16) = rad(2⁴) = rad(2) = 2,

rad(17) = 17,

rad(18) = rad(2 ⋅ 3²) = 2 · 3 = 6,

rad(1000000) = rad(2⁶ ⋅ 5⁶) = 2 ⋅ 5 = 10.

If a, b, and c are coprime[notes 1] positive integers such that a + b = c, it turns out that "usually" c < rad(abc). The abc conjecture deals with the exceptions. Specifically, it states that:

For every positive real number ε, there exist only finitely many triples (a, b, c) of coprime positive integers, with a + b = c, such that

${\displaystyle c>\operatorname {rad} (abc)^{1+\varepsilon }.}$

An equivalent formulation is:

For every positive real number ε, there exists a constant K_ε such that for all triples (a, b, c) of coprime positive integers, with a + b = c:

${\displaystyle c<K_{\varepsilon }\cdot \operatorname {rad} (abc)^{1+\varepsilon }.}$

A third equivalent formulation of the conjecture involves the quality q(a, b, c) of the triple (a, b, c), which is defined as

${\displaystyle q(a,b,c)={\frac {\log(c)}{\log {\big (}\operatorname {rad} (abc){\big )}}}.}$

For example:

q(4, 127, 131) = log(131) / log(rad(4·127·131)) = log(131) / log(2·127·131) = 0.46820...

q(3, 125, 128) = log(128) / log(rad(3·125·128)) = log(128) / log(30) = 1.426565...

A typical triple (a, b, c) of coprime positive integers with a + b = c will have c < rad(abc), i.e. q(a, b, c) < 1. Triples with q > 1 such as in the second example are rather special, they consist of numbers divisible by high powers of small prime numbers. The third formulation is:

For every positive real number ε, there exist only finitely many triples (a, b, c) of coprime positive integers with a + b = c such that q(a, b, c) > 1 + ε.

Whereas it is known that there are infinitely many triples (a, b, c) of coprime positive integers with a + b = c such that q(a, b, c) > 1, the conjecture predicts that only finitely many of those have q > 1.01 or q > 1.001 or even q > 1.0001, etc. In particular, if the conjecture is true, then there must exist a triple (a, b, c) that achieves the maximal possible quality q(a, b, c) .

Examples of triples with small radical

The condition that ε > 0 is necessary as there exist infinitely many triples a, b, c with c > rad(abc). For example, let

${\displaystyle a=1,\quad b=2^{6n}-1,\quad c=2^{6n},\qquad n>1.}$

The integer b is divisible by 9:

${\displaystyle b=2^{6n}-1=64^{n}-1=(64-1)(\cdots )=9\cdot 7\cdot (\cdots ).}$

Using this fact we calculate:

${\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\operatorname {rad} (abc)&=\operatorname {rad} (a)\operatorname {rad} (b)\operatorname {rad} (c)\\&=\operatorname {rad} (1)\operatorname {rad} \left(2^{6n}-1\right)\operatorname {rad} \left(2^{6n}\right)\\&=2\operatorname {rad} \left(2^{6n}-1\right)\\&=2\operatorname {rad} \left(9\cdot {\tfrac {b}{9}}\right)\\&\leqslant 2\cdot 3\cdot {\tfrac {b}{9}}\\&=2{\tfrac {b}{3}}\\&<{\tfrac {2}{3}}c.\end{aligned}}}$

By replacing the exponent 6n by other exponents forcing b to have larger square factors, the ratio between the radical and c can be made arbitrarily small. Specifically, let p > 2 be a prime and consider

${\displaystyle a=1,\quad b=2^{p(p-1)n}-1,\quad c=2^{p(p-1)n},\qquad n>1.}$

Now we claim that b is divisible by p²:

${\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}b&=2^{p(p-1)n}-1\\&=\left(2^{p(p-1)}\right)^{n}-1\\&=\left(2^{p(p-1)}-1\right)(\cdots )\\&=p^{2}\cdot r(\cdots ).\end{aligned}}}$

The last step uses the fact that p² divides 2^p(p−1) − 1. This follows from Fermat's little theorem, which shows that, for p > 2, 2^p−1 = pk + 1 for some integer k. Raising both sides to the power of p then shows that 2^p(p−1) = p²(...) + 1.

And now with a similar calculation as above we have

${\displaystyle \operatorname {rad} (abc)<{\tfrac {2}{p}}c.}$

A list of the highest-quality triples (triples with a particularly small radical relative to c) is given below; the highest quality, 1.6299, was found by Eric Reyssat (Lando & Zvonkin 2004, p. 137) for

a = 2,

b = 3¹⁰·109 = 6436341,

c = 23⁵ = 6436343,

rad(abc) = 15042.

Some consequences

The abc conjecture has a large number of consequences. These include both known results (some of which have been proven separately since the conjecture has been stated) and conjectures for which it gives a conditional proof. The consequences include:

• Roth's theorem on diophantine approximation of algebraic numbers.[5]
• The Mordell conjecture (already proven in general by Gerd Faltings).[6]
• As equivalent, Vojta's conjecture in dimension 1.[7]
• The Erdős–Woods conjecture allowing for a finite number of counterexamples.[8]
• The existence of infinitely many non-Wieferich primes in every base b > 1.[9]
• The weak form of Marshall Hall's conjecture on the separation between squares and cubes of integers.[10]
• The Fermat–Catalan conjecture, a generalization of Fermat's last theorem concerning powers that are sums of powers.[11]
• The L-function L(s, χ_d) formed with the Legendre symbol, has no Siegel zero, given a uniform version of the abc conjecture in number fields, not just the abc conjecture as formulated above for rational integers.[12]
• A polynomial P(x) has only finitely many perfect powers for all integers x if P has at least three simple zeros.[13]
• A generalization of Tijdeman's theorem concerning the number of solutions of y^m = xⁿ + k (Tijdeman's theorem answers the case k = 1), and Pillai's conjecture (1931) concerning the number of solutions of Ay^m = Bxⁿ + k.
• As equivalent, the Granville–Langevin conjecture, that if f is a square-free binary form of degree n > 2, then for every real β > 2 there is a constant C(f, β) such that for all coprime integers x, y, the radical of f(x, y) exceeds C · max{|x|, |y|}^n−β.[14]
• As equivalent, the modified Szpiro conjecture, which would yield a bound of rad(abc)^1.2+ε.[2]
• Dąbrowski (1996) has shown that the abc conjecture implies that the Diophantine equation n! + A = k² has only finitely many solutions for any given integer A.
• There are ~c_fN positive integers n ≤ N for which f(n)/B' is square-free, with c_f > 0 a positive constant defined as:[15]

${\displaystyle c_{f}=\prod _{{\text{prime }}p}x_{i}\left(1-{\frac {\omega \,\!_{f}(p)}{p^{2+q_{p}}}}\right).}$

• Fermat's Last Theorem has a famously difficult proof by Andrew Wiles. However it follows easily, at least for ${\displaystyle n\geq 6}$, from an effective form of a weak version of the abc conjecture. The abc conjecture says the lim sup of the set of all qualities (defined above) is 1, which implies the much weaker assertion that there is a finite upper bound for qualities. The conjecture that 2 is such an upper bound suffices for a very short proof of Fermat's Last Theorem for ${\displaystyle n\geq 6}$.[16]
• The Beal conjecture, a generalization of Fermat's last theorem proposing that if A, B, C, x, y, and z are positive integers with A^x + B^y = C^z and x, y, z > 2, then A, B, and C have a common prime factor. The abc conjecture would imply that there are only finitely many counterexamples.
• Lang's conjecture, a lower bound for the height of a non-torsion rational point of an elliptic curve.
• A negative solution to the Erdős–Ulam problem.[17]

Theoretical results

The abc conjecture implies that c can be bounded above by a near-linear function of the radical of abc. Bounds are known that are exponential. Specifically, the following bounds have been proven:

${\displaystyle c<\exp {\left(K_{1}\operatorname {rad} (abc)^{15}\right)}}$ (Stewart & Tijdeman 1986),

${\displaystyle c<\exp {\left(K_{2}\operatorname {rad} (abc)^{{\frac {2}{3}}+\varepsilon }\right)}}$ (Stewart & Yu 1991), and

${\displaystyle c<\exp {\left(K_{3}\operatorname {rad} (abc)^{\frac {1}{3}}\left(\log(\operatorname {rad} (abc))\right)^{3}\right)}}$ (Stewart & Yu 2001).

In these bounds, K₁ and K₃ are constants that do not depend on a, b, or c, and K₂ is a constant that depends on ε (in an effectively computable way) but not on a, b, or c. The bounds apply to any triple for which c > 2.

Computational results

In 2006, the Mathematics Department of Leiden University in the Netherlands, together with the Dutch Kennislink science institute, launched the ABC@Home project, a grid computing system, which aims to discover additional triples a, b, c with rad(abc) < c. Although no finite set of examples or counterexamples can resolve the abc conjecture, it is hoped that patterns in the triples discovered by this project will lead to insights about the conjecture and about number theory more generally.

Distribution of triples with q > 1[18]

q c	q > 1	q > 1.05	q > 1.1	q > 1.2	q > 1.3	q > 1.4
c < 10^2	6	4	4	2	0	0
c < 10^3	31	17	14	8	3	1
c < 10^4	120	74	50	22	8	3
c < 10^5	418	240	152	51	13	6
c < 10^6	1,268	667	379	102	29	11
c < 10^7	3,499	1,669	856	210	60	17
c < 10^8	8,987	3,869	1,801	384	98	25
c < 10^9	22,316	8,742	3,693	706	144	34
c < 10^10	51,677	18,233	7,035	1,159	218	51
c < 10^11	116,978	37,612	13,266	1,947	327	64
c < 10^12	252,856	73,714	23,773	3,028	455	74
c < 10^13	528,275	139,762	41,438	4,519	599	84
c < 10^14	1,075,319	258,168	70,047	6,665	769	98
c < 10^15	2,131,671	463,446	115,041	9,497	998	112
c < 10^16	4,119,410	812,499	184,727	13,118	1,232	126
c < 10^17	7,801,334	1,396,909	290,965	17,890	1,530	143
c < 10^18	14,482,065	2,352,105	449,194	24,013	1,843	160

As of May 2014, ABC@Home had found 23.8 million triples.[19]

Highest-quality triples[20]

Rank	q	a	b	c	Discovered by
1	1.6299	2	3^10·109	23^5	Eric Reyssat
2	1.6260	11^2	3^2·5^6·7^3	2^21·23	Benne de Weger
3	1.6235	19·1307	7·29^2·31^8	2^8·3^22·5^4	Jerzy Browkin, Juliusz Brzezinski
4	1.5808	283	5^11·13^2	2^8·3^8·17^3	Jerzy Browkin, Juliusz Brzezinski, Abderrahmane Nitaj
5	1.5679	1	2·3^7	5^4·7	Benne de Weger

Note: the quality q(a, b, c) of the triple (a, b, c) is defined above.

Refined forms, generalizations and related statements

The abc conjecture is an integer analogue of the Mason–Stothers theorem for polynomials.

A strengthening, proposed by Baker (1998), states that in the abc conjecture one can replace rad(abc) by

ε^−ω rad(abc),

where ω is the total number of distinct primes dividing a, b and c.[21]

Andrew Granville noticed that the minimum of the function ${\displaystyle {\big (}\varepsilon ^{-\omega }\operatorname {rad} (abc){\big )}^{1+\varepsilon }}$ over ${\displaystyle \varepsilon >0}$ occurs when ${\displaystyle \varepsilon ={\frac {\omega }{\log {\big (}\operatorname {rad} (abc){\big )}}}.}$

This incited Baker (2004) to propose a sharper form of the abc conjecture, namely:

${\displaystyle c<\kappa \operatorname {rad} (abc){\frac {{\Big (}\log {\big (}\operatorname {rad} (abc){\big )}{\Big )}^{\omega }}{\omega$ !}}}

with κ an absolute constant. After some computational experiments he found that a value of ${\displaystyle 6/5}$ was admissible for κ.

This version is called "explicit abc conjecture".

Baker (1998) also describes related conjectures of Andrew Granville that would give upper bounds on c of the form

${\displaystyle K^{\Omega (abc)}\operatorname {rad} (abc),}$

where Ω(n) is the total number of prime factors of n, and

${\displaystyle O{\big (}\operatorname {rad} (abc)\Theta (abc){\big )},}$

where Θ(n) is the number of integers up to n divisible only by primes dividing n.

Robert, Stewart & Tenenbaum (2014) proposed a more precise inequality based on Robert & Tenenbaum (2013). Let k = rad(abc). They conjectured there is a constant C₁ such that

${\displaystyle c<k\exp \left(4{\sqrt {\frac {3\log k}{\log \log k}}}\left(1+{\frac {\log \log \log k}{2\log \log k}}+{\frac {C_{1}}{\log \log k}}\right)\right)}$

holds whereas there is a constant C₂ such that

${\displaystyle c>k\exp \left(4{\sqrt {\frac {3\log k}{\log \log k}}}\left(1+{\frac {\log \log \log k}{2\log \log k}}+{\frac {C_{2}}{\log \log k}}\right)\right)}$

holds infinitely often.

Browkin & Brzeziński (1994) formulated the n conjecture—a version of the abc conjecture involving n > 2 integers.

Claimed proofs

Lucien Szpiro proposed a solution in 2007, but it was found to be incorrect shortly afterwards.[22]

In August 2012, Shinichi Mochizuki claimed a proof of Szpiro's conjecture and therefore the abc conjecture.[23] He released a series of four preprints developing a new theory called inter-universal Teichmüller theory (IUTT) which is then applied to prove several famous conjectures in number theory, including the abc conjecture and the hyperbolic Vojta's conjecture.[24] The papers have not been accepted by the mathematical community as providing a proof of abc.[25] This is not only because of their difficulty to understand and length,[26] but also because at least one specific point in the argument has been identified as a gap by some other experts.[27] Although a few mathematicians have vouched for the correctness of the proof,[28] and have attempted to communicate their understanding via workshops on IUTT, they have failed to convince the number theory community at large.[29][30]

In March 2018, Peter Scholze and Jakob Stix visited Kyoto for discussions with Mochizuki.[31][32] While they did not resolve the differences, they brought them into clearer focus. Scholze and Stix concluded that the gap was "so severe that … small modifications will not rescue the proof strategy";[33] Mochizuki claimed that they misunderstood vital aspects of the theory and made invalid simplifications.[34][35][36]

On April 3, 2020, two Japanese mathematicians announced that Mochizuki's claimed proof would be published in Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences (RIMS), a journal of which Mochizuki is chief editor.[3] The announcement was received with skepticism by Kiran Kedlaya and Edward Frenkel, as well as being described by Nature as "unlikely to move many researchers over to Mochizuki's camp."[3]

See also

• List of unsolved problems in mathematics

Notes

1. When a + b = c, coprimeness of a, b, c implies pairwise coprimeness of a, b, c. So in this case, it does not matter which concept we use.

References

1. Fesenko, Ivan (2015), "Arithmetic deformation theory via arithmetic fundamental groups and nonarchimedean theta functions, notes on the work of Shinichi Mochizuki" (PDF), European Journal of Mathematics, 1 (3): 405–440, doi:10.1007/s40879-015-0066-0.
2. Oesterlé (1988).
3. Castelvecchi, Davide (3 April 2020). "Mathematical proof that rocked number theory will be published". Nature. doi:10.1038/d41586-020-00998-2.
4. Further comment by P. Scholze at Not Even Wrong.
5. Bombieri (1994).
6. Elkies (1991).
7. Van Frankenhuijsen (2002).
8. Langevin (1993).
9. Silverman (1988).
10. Nitaj (1996).
11. Pomerance (2008).
12. Granville & Stark (2000).
13. The ABC-conjecture, Frits Beukers, ABC-DAY, Leiden, Utrecht University, 9 September 2005.
14. Mollin (2009); Mollin (2010, p. 297)
15. Granville (1998).
16. Granville, Andrew; Tucker, Thomas (2002). "It's As Easy As abc" (PDF). Notices of the AMS. 49 (10): 1224–1231.
17. Pasten, Hector (2017), "Definability of Frobenius orbits and a result on rational distance sets", Monatshefte für Mathematik, 182 (1): 99–126, doi:10.1007/s00605-016-0973-2, MR 3592123
18. "Synthese resultaten", RekenMeeMetABC.nl (in Dutch), archived from the original on December 22, 2008, retrieved October 3, 2012.
19. "Data collected sofar", ABC@Home, archived from the original on May 15, 2014, retrieved April 30, 2014
20. "100 unbeaten triples". Reken mee met ABC. 2010-11-07.
21. Bombieri & Gubler (2006), p. 404.
22. "Finiteness Theorems for Dynamical Systems", Lucien Szpiro, talk at Conference on L-functions and Automorphic Forms (on the occasion of Dorian Goldfeld's 60th Birthday), Columbia University, May 2007. See Woit, Peter (May 26, 2007), "Proof of the abc Conjecture?", Not Even Wrong.
23. Ball, Peter (10 September 2012). "Proof claimed for deep connection between primes". Nature. doi:10.1038/nature.2012.11378. Retrieved 19 March 2018.
24. Mochizuki, Shinichi (May 2015). Inter-universal Teichmuller Theory IV: Log-volume Computations and Set-theoretic Foundations, available at http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/papers-english.html
25. "The ABC conjecture has still not been proved". December 17, 2017. Retrieved March 17, 2018.
26. Revell, Timothy (September 7, 2017). "Baffling ABC maths proof now has impenetrable 300-page 'summary'". New Scientist.
27. "The ABC conjecture has still not been proved, comment by Bcnrd". December 22, 2017. Retrieved March 18, 2017.
28. Fesenko, Ivan. "Fukugen". Inference. Retrieved 19 March 2018.
29. Conrad, Brian (December 15, 2015). "Notes on the Oxford IUT workshop by Brian Conrad". Retrieved March 18, 2018.
30. Castelvecchi, Davide (8 October 2015). "The biggest mystery in mathematics: Shinichi Mochizuki and the impenetrable proof". Nature. 526 (7572): 178–181. Bibcode:2015Natur.526..178C. doi:10.1038/526178a. PMID 26450038.
31. Klarreich, Erica (September 20, 2018). "Titans of Mathematics Clash Over Epic Proof of ABC Conjecture". Quanta Magazine.
32. "March 2018 Discussions on IUTeich". Retrieved October 2, 2018. Web-page by Mochizuki describing discussions and linking consequent publications and supplementary material
33. Scholze, Peter; Stix, Jakob. "Why abc is still a conjecture" (PDF). Retrieved September 23, 2018. (updated version of their May report)
34. Mochizuki, Shinichi. "Report on Discussions, Held during the Period March 15 – 20, 2018, Concerning Inter-Universal Teichmüller Theory" (PDF). Retrieved February 1, 2019. the … discussions … constitute the first detailed, … substantive discussions concerning negative positions … IUTch.
35. Mochizuki, Shinichi. "Comments on the manuscript by Scholze-Stix concerning Inter-Universal Teichmüller Theory" (PDF). Retrieved October 2, 2018.
36. Mochizuki, Shinichi. "Comments on the manuscript (2018-08 version) by Scholze-Stix concerning Inter-Universal Teichmüller Theory" (PDF). Retrieved October 2, 2018.

Sources

• Baker, Alan (1998). "Logarithmic forms and the abc-conjecture". In Győry, Kálmán (ed.). Number theory. Diophantine, computational and algebraic aspects. Proceedings of the international conference, Eger, Hungary, July 29-August 2, 1996. Berlin: de Gruyter. pp. 37–44. ISBN 3-11-015364-5. Zbl 0973.11047.
• Baker, Alan (2004). "Experiments on the abc-conjecture". Publ. Math. Debrecen. 65: 253–260.
• Bombieri, Enrico (1994). "Roth's theorem and the abc-conjecture". Preprint. ETH Zürich.
• Bombieri, Enrico; Gubler, Walter (2006). Heights in Diophantine Geometry. New Mathematical Monographs. 4. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.2277/0521846153. ISBN 978-0-521-71229-3. Zbl 1130.11034.
• Browkin, Jerzy; Brzeziński, Juliusz (1994). "Some remarks on the abc-conjecture". Math. Comp. 62 (206): 931–939. Bibcode:1994MaCom..62..931B. doi:10.2307/2153551. JSTOR 2153551.
• Browkin, Jerzy (2000). "The abc-conjecture". In Bambah, R. P.; Dumir, V. C.; Hans-Gill, R. J. (eds.). Number Theory. Trends in Mathematics. Basel: Birkhäuser. pp. 75–106. ISBN 3-7643-6259-6.
• Dąbrowski, Andrzej (1996). "On the diophantine equation x! + A = y²". Nieuw Archief voor Wiskunde, IV. 14: 321–324. Zbl 0876.11015.
• Elkies, N. D. (1991). "ABC implies Mordell". International Mathematics Research Notices. 1991 (7): 99–109. doi:10.1155/S1073792891000144.
• Frey, Gerhard (1997). "On Ternary Equations of Fermat Type and Relations with Elliptic Curves". Modular Forms and Fermat's Last Theorem. New York: Springer. pp. 527–548. ISBN 0-387-94609-8.
• Goldfeld, Dorian (1996). "Beyond the last theorem". Math Horizons. 4 (September): 26–34. doi:10.1080/10724117.1996.11974985. JSTOR 25678079.
• Goldfeld, Dorian (2002). "Modular forms, elliptic curves and the abc-conjecture". In Wüstholz, Gisbert (ed.). A panorama in number theory or The view from Baker's garden. Based on a conference in honor of Alan Baker's 60th birthday, Zürich, Switzerland, 1999. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 128–147. ISBN 0-521-80799-9. Zbl 1046.11035.
• Gowers, Timothy; Barrow-Green, June; Leader, Imre, eds. (2008). The Princeton Companion to Mathematics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. pp. 361–362, 681. ISBN 978-0-691-11880-2.
• Granville, A. (1998). "ABC Allows Us to Count Squarefrees" (PDF). International Mathematics Research Notices. 1998 (19): 991–1009. doi:10.1155/S1073792898000592.
• Granville, Andrew; Stark, H. (2000). "ABC implies no "Siegel zeros" for L-functions of characters with negative exponent" (PDF). Inventiones Mathematicae. 139: 509–523. Bibcode:2000InMat.139..509G. doi:10.1007/s002229900036.
• Granville, Andrew; Tucker, Thomas (2002). "It's As Easy As abc" (PDF). Notices of the AMS. 49 (10): 1224–1231.
• Guy, Richard K. (2004). Unsolved Problems in Number Theory. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-20860-7.
• Lando, Sergei K.; Zvonkin, Alexander K. (2004). "Graphs on Surfaces and Their Applications". Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences: Lower-Dimensional Topology II. 141. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 3-540-00203-0.
• Langevin, M. (1993). "Cas d'égalité pour le théorème de Mason et applications de la conjecture abc". Comptes rendus de l'Académie des sciences (in French). 317 (5): 441–444.
• Masser, D. W. (1985). "Open problems". In Chen, W. W. L. (ed.). Proceedings of the Symposium on Analytic Number Theory. London: Imperial College.
• Mollin, R.A. (2009). "A note on the ABC-conjecture" (PDF). Far East J. Math. Sci. 33 (3): 267–275. ISSN 0972-0871. Zbl 1241.11034. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2013-06-14.
• Mollin, Richard A. (2010). Advanced number theory with applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. ISBN 978-1-4200-8328-6. Zbl 1200.11002.
• Nitaj, Abderrahmane (1996). "La conjecture abc". Enseign. Math. (in French). 42 (1–2): 3–24.
• Oesterlé, Joseph (1988), "Nouvelles approches du "théorème" de Fermat", Astérisque, Séminaire Bourbaki exp 694 (161): 165–186, ISSN 0303-1179, MR 0992208
• Pomerance, Carl (2008). "Computational Number Theory". The Princeton Companion to Mathematics. Princeton University Press. pp. 361–362.
• Silverman, Joseph H. (1988). "Wieferich's criterion and the abc-conjecture". Journal of Number Theory. 30 (2): 226–237. doi:10.1016/0022-314X(88)90019-4. Zbl 0654.10019.
• Robert, Olivier; Stewart, Cameron L.; Tenenbaum, Gérald (2014). "A refinement of the abc conjecture" (PDF). Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society. 46 (6): 1156–1166. doi:10.1112/blms/bdu069.
• Robert, Olivier; Tenenbaum, Gérald (2013). "Sur la répartition du noyau d'un entier". Indag. Math. 24 (4): 802–914. doi:10.1016/j.indag.2013.07.007.
• Stewart, C. L.; Tijdeman, R. (1986). "On the Oesterlé-Masser conjecture". Monatshefte für Mathematik. 102 (3): 251–257. doi:10.1007/BF01294603.
• Stewart, C. L.; Yu, Kunrui (1991). "On the abc conjecture". Mathematische Annalen. 291 (1): 225–230. doi:10.1007/BF01445201.
• Stewart, C. L.; Yu, Kunrui (2001). "On the abc conjecture, II". Duke Mathematical Journal. 108 (1): 169–181. doi:10.1215/S0012-7094-01-10815-6.
• Van Frankenhuijsen, Machiel (2002). "The ABC conjecture implies Vojta's height inequality for curves". J. Number Theory. 95 (2): 289–302. doi:10.1006/jnth.2001.2769. MR 1924103.

External links

• ABC@home Distributed computing project called ABC@Home.
• Easy as ABC: Easy to follow, detailed explanation by Brian Hayes.
• Weisstein, Eric W. "abc Conjecture". MathWorld.
• Abderrahmane Nitaj's ABC conjecture home page
• Bart de Smit's ABC Triples webpage
• http://www.math.columbia.edu/~goldfeld/ABC-Conjecture.pdf
• The ABC's of Number Theory by Noam D. Elkies
• Questions about Number by Barry Mazur
• Philosophy behind Mochizuki’s work on the ABC conjecture on MathOverflow
• ABC Conjecture Polymath project wiki page linking to various sources of commentary on Mochizuki's papers.
• abc Conjecture Numberphile video
• News about IUT by Mochizuki