**Completely rewritten. (9/26)**

It seems indeed that nothing like Theorem 1.10 from Mochizuki's IUTT-IV could hold. 

Here is an infinite set of counterexamples, assuming for convenience two standard conjectures (the first being in fact a consequence of ABC), that contradict Thm. 1.10 *very* badly. 

*Assumptions:* 

- A (Consequence of ABC) *For all but finitely many elliptic curves over $\mathbb{Q}$, the conductor $N$ and the minimal discriminant $\Delta$ satisfy $\log{|\Delta|} < (\log{N})^2$.*

- B (Uniform Serre Open Image conjecture) *For each* $d \in \mathbb{N}$, *there is a constant* $c(d) < \infty$ *such that for every number field* $F/\mathbb{Q}$ with $[F:\mathbb{Q}] \leq d$, *and every
     non-CM elliptic curve* $E$ *over* $F$, *and every prime* $\ell \geq c(d)$, *the Galois representation of* $G_F$ *on* $E[\ell]$ *has full image* $\mathrm{GL}_2(\mathbb{Z}/{\ell})$. (In fact, it is sufficient to take the weaker version in which $F$ is held fixed. )

Further, as far as I can tell from the proof of Theorem 1.10 of IUTTIV, the only reason for taking $F := F_{\mathrm{tpd}}\big( \sqrt{-1}, E_{F_{\mathrm{tpd}}}[3\cdot 5]
 \big)$ --- rather than simply $F := F_{\mathrm{tpd}}(\sqrt{-1})$ --- was to ensure that $E$ has semistable reduction over $F$. *Since I will only work in what follows with semistable elliptic curves over* $\mathbb{Q}$, *I will assume, for a mild technical convenience in the examples below, that for elliptic curves already semistable over* $F_{\mathrm{tpd}}$, *we may actually take* $F := F_{\mathrm{tpd}}(\sqrt{-1})$ *in Theorem 1.10.*


*The infinite set of counterexamples.* They come from Masser's paper [Masser: Note on a conjecture of Szpiro, *Asterisque* 1990], as follows. Masser has produced an infinite set of Frey-Hellougarch (i.e., semistable and with rational 2-torsion) elliptic curves over $\mathbb{Q}$ whose conductor $N$ and minimal discriminant $\Delta$ satisfy
$$
(1) \hspace{3cm} \frac{1}{6}\log{|\Delta|} \geq \log{N} + \frac{\sqrt{\log{N}}}{\log{\log{N}}}.
$$
(Thus, $N$ in these examples may be taken arbitrarily large. ) By (A) above, taking $N$ big enough will ensure that
$$
(2) \hspace{3cm} \log{|\Delta|} < (\log{N})^2.
$$
Next, the sum of the logarithms of the primes in the interval $\big( (\log{N})^2, 3(\log{N})^2 \big)$ is $2(\log{N})^2 + o((\log{N})^2)$, so it is certainly $> (\log{N})^2$ for $N \gg 0$ big enough.  Thus, by (2), it is easy to see that the interval $\big( (\log{N})^2, 3(\log{N})^2 \big)$ contains a prime $\ell$ which divides neither $|\Delta|$ nor any of the exponents $\alpha = \mathrm{ord}_p(\Delta)$ in the prime factorization $|\Delta| = \prod p^{\alpha}$ of $|\Delta|$.

Consider now the pair $(E,\ell)$: it has $F_{\mathrm{mod}} = \mathbb{Q}$, and since $E$ has rational $2$-torsion, $F_{\mathrm{tpd}} = \mathbb{Q}$ as well. Let $F := \mathbb{Q} \big(
\sqrt{-1}\big)$. I claim that, upon taking $N$ big enough, the pair $(E_F,\ell)$ arises from an **initial $\Theta$-datum** as  in IUTT-I, Definition 3.1. Indeed:

- Certainly (a), (e), (f) of IUTT-I, Def. 3.1 are satisfied (with appropriate $\underline{\mathbb{V}}, \, \underline{\epsilon}$);
- (b) of IUTT-I, Def. 3.1 is satisfied since by construction $E$ is semistable over $\mathbb{Q}$;
- (c) of IUTT-I, Def. 3.1 is satisfied, in view of (B) above and the choice of $\ell$, as soon as $N \gg 0$ is big enough (recall that $\ell > (\log{N})^2$ by construction!), and by the observation that, for $v$ a place of $F = \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-1})$, the order of the $v$-adic $q$-parameter of $E$ equals $\mathrm{ord}_v (\Delta)$, which equals $\mathrm{ord}_p(\Delta)$ for $v \mid p > 2$, and $2\cdot\mathrm{ord}_2(\Delta)$ for $v \mid 2$; 

while $\mathbb{V}_{\mathrm{mod}}^{\mathrm{bad}}$ consists of the primes dividing $\Delta$;

- Finally, (d) of IUTT-I, Def. 3.1 is satisfied upon excluding at most four of Masser's examples $E$. (See page 37 of IUTT-IV).


**Now**, take $\epsilon := \big( \log{N} \big)^{-2}$ in Theorem 1.10 of IUTT-IV; this is certainly permissible for $N \gg 0$ large enough. *I claim that the conclusion of Theorem 1.10 contradicts (1) as soon as $N \gg 0$ is large enough.*

For note that Mochizuki's quantity $\log(\mathfrak{q})$ is precisely $\log{|\Delta|}$ (reference: see e.g. Szpiro's article in the Grothendieck Festschrift, vol. 3); his $\log{(\mathfrak{d}^{\mathrm{tpd}})}$ is zero; his $d_{\mathrm{mod}}$ is $1$; and his $\log{(\mathfrak{f}^{\mathrm{tpd}})}$ is our $\log{N}$. By construction, our choice $\epsilon := \big( \log{N} \big)^{-2}$ then makes $1/\ell < \epsilon$ and $\ell < 3/\epsilon$, whence the finaly display of Theorem 1.10 would yield
$$
\frac{1}{6} \log{|\Delta|} \leq (1+29\epsilon) \cdot \log{N} + 2\log{(3\epsilon^{-8})}
< \log{N} + 16\log{\log{N}} + 32,
$$
where we have used $\epsilon \log{N} = (\log{N})^{-1} < 1$ for $N > 3$, and $2\log{3} < 3$.



*The last display contradicts (1) as soon as $N \gg 0$ is big enough.*



Thus Masser's examples yield infinitely many counterexamples to Theorem 1.10 of IUTT-IV (as presently written).