Erdős–Straus conjecture
unproven statement in number theory

The Erdős–Straus conjecture is an unproven statement in number theory. The conjecture is that, for every integer
n
{\displaystyle n}
that is greater than or equal to 2, there exist positive integers
x
{\displaystyle x}
,
y
{\displaystyle y}
, and
z
{\displaystyle z}
for which
4
n
=
1
x
+
1
y
+
1
z
.
{\displaystyle {\frac {4}{n}}={\frac {1}{x}}+{\frac {1}{y}}+{\frac {1}{z}}.}
In other words, the number
4
/
n
{\displaystyle 4/n}
can be written as a sum of three positive unit fractions.
The conjecture is named after Paul Erdős and Ernst G. Straus, who formulated it in 1948, but it is connected to much more ancient mathematics; sums of unit fractions, like the one in this problem, are known as Egyptian fractions, because of their use in ancient Egyptian mathematics. The Erdős–Straus conjecture is one of many conjectures by Erdős, and one of many unsolved problems in mathematics concerning Diophantine equations.
Although a solution is not known for all values of n, infinitely many values in certain infinite arithmetic progressions have simple formulas for their solution, and skipping these known values can speed up searches for counterexamples. Additionally, these searches need only consider values of
n
{\displaystyle n}
that are prime numbers, because any composite counterexample would have a smaller counterexample among its prime factors. Computer searches have verified the truth of the conjecture up to
n
≤
10
17
{\displaystyle n\leq 10^{17}}
.
If the conjecture is reframed to allow negative unit fractions, then it is known to be true. Generalizations of the conjecture to fractions with numerator 5 or larger have also been studied.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Erdős–Straus conjecture” is unproven statement in number theory. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Erdős, Straus and conjecture, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “unproven statement in number theory” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 3, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1349651. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1948.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Erdős–Straus conjecture”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Erdős–Straus conjecture primary sources, Erdős–Straus conjecture archive and Erdős research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Erdős–Straus conjecture”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Erdős–Straus conjecture” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.