What would be the best lower bound for the number of squares modulo $p$ in an interval $[1,N]$ with $N<p$ that are prime?
Via the Burgess bound, I can find a lower bound for the number of squares modulo $p$ in $[1,N]$, but I would need a bound for the number of squares that are also prime. Since the size of $N$ matters, in my particular case I have $$ N=\frac{\sqrt{p}}{2}. $$ Thank you very much!

  • $\begingroup$ This seems like an odd phrasing — wouldn't it properly be 'the number of primes $\leq N$ that are squares modulo some $p\gt n$'? $\endgroup$ Jul 15 at 17:34

Here is the paper by P. Pollack on the distribution of non-residues and residues. Theorem 1.3 states that for any $\varepsilon>0$, $A<\infty$ and large enough $m$ there are at least $(\ln m)^A$ prime quadratic residues $\mod m$ below $m^{1/4+\varepsilon}$. I think, one can do a lot better under the assumption of some conjectures regarding distribution of zeros of $L$-functions. For example, if GRH is true, then there are $\frac{x}{2\ln x}+O(\sqrt{x}\ln^2 p)$ prime quadratic residues below $x<p$.

One can also probably derive some bounds similar to Pollack's result, but with $(\ln m)^A$ replaced with something like $$ \exp(c\ln m\ln\ln\ln m/\ln\ln m), $$ if there are no Siegel zeros.

EDIT: The paper https://www.ams.org/journals/proc/2020-148-09/S0002-9939-2020-15011-3/, mentioned in the comment below, gives at least $$ Cp^{9/160} $$ prime residues below $\sqrt{p}/2$.

EDIT 2: $9/160$ can actually be replaced by $1/4-o(1)$, see this article, Theorem 1.1.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.