Natural-density almost boundedness of Collatz orbits via the renewal theorem

1. Result

Write $\mathrm{Syr}(N)=(3N+1)/2^{\nu_2(3N+1)}$ on odd $N$, $\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(N)=\min_{k\ge0}\mathrm{Syr}^k(N)$, and $\mathrm{Col}_{\min}(N)$ for the minimum of the Collatz orbit of $N\ge1$. Tao [1, Thm 1.3] proved: for every $f:\mathbb N\to\mathbb R$ with $f(N)\to\infty$, $\mathrm{Col}_{\min}(N)<f(N)$ for all $N$ outside a set of logarithmic density $0$. Quantitatively [1, Thm 3.1], the odd $N$ with $\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(N)>N_0$ have logarithmic density $\ll\log^{-c}N_0$. Tao notes that the multiplicative inaccuracy $\exp(O(n^{1/2}))$ in $\mathrm{Syr}^n(N)\approx(3/4)^nN$ is the main reason for working with logarithmic density [1, §1.2], and that natural density seems to need "a suitable fine scale mixing property of the entire random affine map $\mathrm{Aff}_{\mathrm{Geom}(2)^n}$", which "looks plausibly attainable from the methods in this paper" [1, Remark 1.16]; see also [1, Remark 1.4]: "it is plausible that some refinement of the arguments below will allow one to replace logarithmic density by natural density".

Priority. Allikvere [9] (v1 13 July 2026, v2 22 July 2026) proved this upgrade first, and with more: an explicit exceptional-set rate $O((\log N_0)^{-1/29}+x^{-1/2000})$ and a time clock $<12\ln N$. I missed [9] when v1 of this note was written and accepted, and I withdraw v1's claim that the result is new. What remains here is an independent proof of the qualitative statement by a different archimedean step. In [9] the uniform-measure fibre sum is reduced to a local-limit sum along $\{n\log_23\}$, which needs quantitative equidistribution, supplied by an effective irrationality measure for $\log_23$ (Baker, Rhin). Here the same step is the qualitative key renewal theorem for a non-arithmetic walk, which needs only the irrationality of $\log_23$. This works because the architecture differs. [9] reruns Tao's scale iteration in the uniform measure, so its stabilisation estimate (Theorem D) needs a rate $\log^{-c}x$ at every scale. We make a single comparison, between a uniform dyadic block and Tao's log-uniform start at the top scale, and then use Tao's log-density bound unchanged. A single $o(1)$ is enough for that. The price is that our $o(1)$ has no rate. So the remark in [9, §9, "Where transcendence enters"], that the natural-density statement consumes transcendence input, applies to that route and to the rate, not to the qualitative statement itself.

Theorem 1. (i) There are absolute constants $c,C>0$ such that for every $N_0\ge2$ $$\limsup_{Z\to\infty}\frac{\#\{N\le Z\text{ odd}:\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(N)>N_0\}}{\#\{N\le Z\text{ odd}\}}\le C\log^{-c}N_0 .$$ (ii) For every $f$ with $f(N)\to\infty$, $\mathrm{Col}_{\min}(N)<f(N)$ for all $N$ outside a set of natural density $0$.

Since natural density $0$ implies logarithmic density $0$, (ii) contains [1, Thm 1.3]. The rate in (i) is inherited from Tao's per-scale bound; we do not improve $c$.

Idea. Tao compares the first-passage location below $x$ of a start that is log-uniform on $[y,y^\alpha]$ at two scales. We compare instead a start $U$ uniform on the odd integers of one dyadic block $[X,2X]$, $X=x^\alpha$, with Tao's log-uniform start at one scale, and show that their first-passage laws below $x$ have total variation distance $o(1)$ (Proposition 4). Two inputs replace the logarithmic averaging:

• Joint 3-adic mixing (Proposition 3): the pair $(\mathrm{Syrac}_n\bmod 3^n,\ |\vec a|)$ is fine-scale mixed in the first coordinate, summed over the second. The multiplier of $\mathrm{Aff}_{\vec a}$ is $3^n2^{-|\vec a|}$, so this is the 3-adic half of Tao's Remark 1.16. It follows from Tao's own Fourier argument once one observes that his majorant for $\chi_n$ is uniform under a twist $e(\theta|\vec a|)$ (Lemma 2). The same statement, by the same mechanism, was found independently and concurrently in [6].
• Archimedean renewal: given the 3-adic data, the remaining coordinate is $\log_2U+|\vec a|-n\log_23$, summed over the passage time $n$. The key renewal theorem for the random walk with steps $\mathrm{Geom}(2)-\log_23$ (non-arithmetic, positive mean $2-\log_23$) gives the same constant $1/\ln(4/3)$ that appears in Tao's main term [1, proof of Prop. 5.2].

The $\exp(O(n^{1/2}))$ spread is then harmless: we never need $\mathrm{Syr}^n(U)$ at a fixed time, only the law of the first passage, which renewal theory controls without concentration.

Status. The proof uses Tao's Sections 5, 6 and 7 essentially verbatim, with the modifications stated; we give those modifications in full and cite the unchanged steps by section and proposition. Sections 2–4 give the proof, Section 5 the numerical checks of the new ingredients, and Section 6 the limitations.

2. Joint fine-scale mixing

Notation (as in [1]). $\vec a=(a_1,\dots,a_n)$, $|\vec a|=a_{[1,n]}$, $F_n(\vec a)=\sum_{i=1}^n3^{n-i}2^{-a_{[i,n]}}$, $\mathrm{Aff}_{\vec a}(N)=3^n2^{-|\vec a|}N+F_n(\vec a)$, so that $\mathrm{Syr}^n(N)=\mathrm{Aff}_{\vec a^{(n)}(N)}(N)$ [1, §1.2]. $\vec{\mathbf a}\equiv\mathrm{Geom}(2)^n$ (iid, $\mathbb P(\mathbf a_i=r)=2^{-r}$), $\lambda=\log_23$, $e(t)=e^{2\pi it}$. $\mathrm{Osc}_{m,n}$ is Tao's oscillation at 3-adic scale $3^{-m}$ [1, Prop. 1.14]. As in [1, §6] we write $\mathbf X_n=\sum_{i=1}^n3^{i-1}2^{-\mathbf a_{[1,i]}}\bmod3^n$; by exchangeability $(\mathbf X_n,|\vec{\mathbf a}|)$ has the same joint law as $(F_n(\vec{\mathbf a})\bmod3^n,|\vec{\mathbf a}|)$.

Lemma 2 (twisted decay). For $3\nmid\xi$ let $\chi(x)=e(-\xi x/3^n)$. For every $A>0$, $$\sup_{\theta\in\mathbb R}\big|\mathbb E\,\chi(\mathbf X_n)\,e(\theta|\vec{\mathbf a}|)\big|\ll_A n^{-A},\qquad\text{hence}\qquad\sup_{r}\big|\mathbb E\,\chi(\mathbf X_n)1_{|\vec{\mathbf a}|=r}\big|\ll_A n^{-A},$$ uniformly in $n$ and $\xi$.

Proof. Follow [1, §7.1]: put $\mathbf b_j=\mathbf a_{2j-1}+\mathbf a_{2j}$ and condition on $(\mathbf b_j)_{j\le n/2}$. Then $|\vec{\mathbf a}|=\mathbf b_{[1,\lfloor n/2\rfloor]}$ ($+\mathbf a_n$ if $n$ is odd), so $e(\theta|\vec{\mathbf a}|)$ is the constant $e(\theta\mathbf b_{[1,\lfloor n/2\rfloor]})$ of modulus $1$, times $e(\theta\mathbf a_n)$ for odd $n$. The conditional factorisation of [1, §7.1] therefore holds with the same factors $f(3^{2j-2}2^{-\mathbf b_{[1,j]}},\mathbf b_j)$, and $g$ replaced by $g_\theta(x)=\mathbb E\chi(x2^{-\mathbf a})e(\theta\mathbf a)$, which still satisfies $|g_\theta|\le1$. Hence $|\mathbb E\chi(\mathbf X_n)e(\theta|\vec{\mathbf a}|)|$ is at most Tao's majorant $\mathbb E\prod_{j\le n/2}|f(3^{2j-2}2^{-\mathbf b_{[1,j]}},\mathbf b_j)|$ [1, §7.1], which is independent of $\theta$ and is $\ll_An^{-A}$ by the rest of [1, §7] (Prop. 7.3 and §§7.2–7.4). The second bound follows from $\mathbb E\chi(\mathbf X_n)1_{|\vec{\mathbf a}|=r}=\int_0^1\mathbb E\chi(\mathbf X_n)e(\theta|\vec{\mathbf a}|)e(-\theta r)\,d\theta$. $\square$

Proposition 3 (joint mixing). For $1\le m\le n$ and every $A>0$, $$\mathrm{JOsc}_{m,n}:=\sum_{s\ge0}\mathrm{Osc}_{m,n}\big(\mathbb P(\mathbf X_n=Y,\ |\vec{\mathbf a}|=s)\big)_{Y\in\mathbb Z/3^n}\ll_Am^{-A}.$$

Since $\sum_s\mathrm{Osc}(c_{\cdot,s})\ge\mathrm{Osc}(\sum_sc_{\cdot,s})$, Proposition 3 strengthens [1, Prop. 1.14]. Equivalently, $d_{\mathrm{TV}}\big((\mathbf X_n,|\vec{\mathbf a}|),(\mathbf X_n+\mathbf u,|\vec{\mathbf a}|)\big)\ll m^{-A}$ for $\mathbf u$ uniform on $3^m\mathbb Z/3^n$ and independent. Because $\mathrm{Aff}_{\vec a}$ is determined by $(F_n(\vec a),|\vec a|)$, this is a fine-scale mixing statement for the 3-adic part of $\mathrm{Aff}_{\mathrm{Geom}(2)^n}$, uniformly in the multiplier.

Proof. We follow [1, §6] and only list the changes.

(a) Reduction to $0.9n\le m\le n$. Since the 3-adic weight of $2^{-a_{[1,i]}}$ is $3^{i-1}$, for $n\le n'$ we have $\mathbf X_{n'}\bmod3^n=\mathbf X_n$, and $|\vec{\mathbf a}^{(n')}|=|\vec{\mathbf a}^{(n)}|+\mathbf a_{[n+1,n']}$ with the second summand independent of $(\mathbf X_n,|\vec{\mathbf a}^{(n)}|)$. Hence the joint law at level $n'$, pushed down mod $3^n$, is the level-$n$ joint law convolved in $s$ with an independent probability distribution, and $\ell^1$ is non-increasing under such convolution. (Averaging in $\mathrm{JOsc}$ acts on $Y$ only, and so commutes with convolution in $s$; this is why the joint version telescopes.) With this, Tao's telescoping [1, start of §6] applies verbatim to the $s$-indexed families.

(b) Exceptional events. Since $\mathrm{Osc}_{m,n}(c)\le2\sum_Yc_Y$ for $c\ge0$, removing an event of probability $p$ costs at most $2p$ in $\mathrm{JOsc}$. First discard $s\notin[n,3n]$ (probability $e^{-cn}$), leaving $O(n)$ values of $s$. Then, for each fixed $s$, remove $\overline E$ and split by $B_k$, $E_k$, $C_{k,l}$ exactly as in [1, §6]. With $s$ fixed beforehand, the condition $|\vec{\mathbf a}|=s$ becomes $\mathbf a_{[k+2,n]}=s-l$ on $C_{k,l}$, which is an event in the second block of digits only. It suffices to show $\sum_Y|g_s(Y)-\mathrm{avg}_{3^m}g_s(Y)|\ll n^{-A-3}$ for each $k,l,s$, where $g_s(Y)=\mathbb P(\mathbf X_n=Y,\ E_k,\ B_k,\ C_{k,l},\ \mathbf a_{[k+2,n]}=s-l)$.

(c) Fourier side. Cauchy–Schwarz and Plancherel reduce this, as in [1, §6], to bounding $\sum_{\xi\notin3^{n-m}\mathbb Z}|\hat g_s(\xi)|^2$. The added event depends only on $\mathbf a_{k+2},\dots,\mathbf a_n$, so Tao's factorisation becomes $$\hat g_s(\xi)=\mathbb E\big[\chi(F_{k+1}(\mathbf a_{k+1},\dots,\mathbf a_1))1_{E_k\wedge B_k\wedge C_{k,l}}\big]\cdot\mathbb E\big[\chi(3^{k+1}2^{-l}F_{n-k-1}(\mathbf a_n,\dots,\mathbf a_{k+2}))1_{\mathbf a_{[k+2,n]}=s-l}\big].$$

(d) Second factor. Write $\xi=3^j2^l\xi'$ with $j<0.1n$ and $3\nmid\xi'$, and put $n''=n-k-j-1\gg n$. Modulo $3^{n''}$, the $j$ digits of $F_{n-k-1}(\mathbf a_n,\dots,\mathbf a_{k+2})$ with the largest 3-adic weight drop out of the phase and enter only through the constraint on the sum. Conditioning on them and using the triangle inequality, $$|\text{second factor}|\le\sup_r\big|\mathbb E\,\chi'(\mathbf X_{n''})1_{|\vec{\mathbf a}^{(n'')}|=r}\big|\ll_{A'}n^{-A'}$$ by Lemma 2, where $\chi'(x)=e(-\xi'x/3^{n''})$. This replaces Tao's appeal to [1, Prop. 1.17].

(e) First factor. It does not involve $s$. Tao's collision bound ([1, §6], Lemma 6.2 and Cor. 6.3) gives $3^n\sum_Y\mathbb P(F_{k+1}=Y,\dots)^2\le n^{O(C_A^2)}$ unchanged. So $\sum_Y|g_s-\mathrm{avg}\,g_s|\ll n^{-A'+O(C_A^2)}$. Choosing $A'$ large and summing over the $n^{O(1)}$ triples $(k,l,s)$ proves the claim. $\square$

3. First passage from a dyadic block

Fix $\alpha=1.001$ as in [1], let $x$ be large, $X=x^\alpha$, and let $\mathbf U$ be uniform on the odd integers in $[X,2X]$. $T_x(N)$ is the first $n$ with $\mathrm{Syr}^n(N)\le x$, and $\mathrm{Pass}_x(N)=\mathrm{Syr}^{T_x(N)}(N)$; for $E\subset2\mathbb N+1\cap[1,x]$, "$\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf U)\in E$" includes $T_x(\mathbf U)<\infty$. We use Tao's $n_0=\lfloor\log x/(10\log2)\rfloor$, $m_0=\lfloor\frac{\alpha-1}{100}\log x\rfloor$, his set $E'$ (odd $M$ with $T_x(M)=m_0$, $\mathrm{Pass}_x(M)\in E$ and $e^{-\log^{0.7}x}(4/3)^{m_0}x\le M\le e^{\log^{0.7}x}(4/3)^{m_0}x$), his sets $\mathcal A^{(n)}$ (tuples with $|a_{[1,i]}-2i|<\log^{0.6}x$ for all $i\le n$), and $$Z(E)=\sum_{M\in E'}\frac{3^{m_0}\,\mathbb P(\mathrm{Syrac}(\mathbb Z/3^{m_0})=M\bmod3^{m_0})}{M}\qquad\text{[1, §5]}.$$

Proposition 4. $\displaystyle\sup_{E\subset2\mathbb N+1\cap[1,x]}\Big|\mathbb P(\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf U)\in E)-\frac{2}{\ln(4/3)}Z(E)\Big|\to0$ as $x\to\infty$.

Tao proves $\mathbb P(\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf N_y)\in E)=(1+O(\log^{-c}x))\frac{2}{\ln(4/3)}Z(E)+O(\log^{-c}x)$ for $\mathbf N_y\equiv\mathrm{Log}(2\mathbb N+1\cap[y,y^\alpha])$, $y=x^\alpha$ [1, proof of Prop. 5.2], with $Z(E)\le Z(2\mathbb N+1\cap[1,x])=O(1)$ (take $E$ to be all of $2\mathbb N+1\cap[1,x]$ in Tao's formula, whose left side is at most $1$). Proposition 4 therefore gives $$d_{\mathrm{TV}}\big(\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf U),\ \mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf N_{x^\alpha})\big)\to0.\tag{3.1}$$

Proof. All error terms below are uniform in $E$.

Step 1 (passage happens, in the expected window). $\mathbf U\bmod2^{3n_0}$ is uniform on odd classes up to total variation $O(2^{3n_0}/X)=O(x^{-0.7})$. So [1, Prop. 1.9] gives $d_{\mathrm{TV}}(\vec a^{(n_0)}(\mathbf U),\mathrm{Geom}(2)^{n_0})\ll x^{-c}$. As in Tao's proof of the first estimate of [1, Prop. 1.11] (with $\mathbf U\le2x^\alpha$ in place of $x^{\alpha^3}$), $\mathbb P(T_x(\mathbf U)=\infty)\ll x^{-c}$, and $\mathbb P(\vec a^{(n_0)}(\mathbf U)\notin\mathcal A^{(n_0)})\ll\log^{-10}x$. On $\mathcal A^{(n_0)}$, $\mathrm{Syr}^n(\mathbf U)=e^{O(\log^{0.6}x)}(3/4)^n\mathbf U$ for $n\le n_0$. So $T_x(\mathbf U)=\log(\mathbf U/x)/\log\frac43+O(\log^{0.6}x)\approx0.00348\log x$, which lies in $[m_0,n_0]$.

Step 2 (passage identity). Tao's two implications [1, proof of Prop. 5.2] use only $m_0\le n\le n_0$ and $\mathcal A^{(n_0)}$, not the window $I_y$. They give, for each $n\in[m_0,n_0]$, the equality of events $$\{T_x(\mathbf U)=n,\ \mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf U)\in E,\ \mathcal A^{(n_0)}\}=\{\mathrm{Syr}^{n-m_0}(\mathbf U)\in E',\ \mathcal A^{(n_0)}\}.$$ The left sides are disjoint in $n$. Summing, and replacing $\mathcal A^{(n_0)}$ by $\mathcal A^{(n')}$, $n'=n-m_0$, at total cost $O(n_0\log^{-10}x)$: $$\mathbb P(\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf U)\in E)=\sum_{n'=0}^{n_0-m_0}\ \sum_{\vec a\in\mathcal A^{(n')}}\ \sum_{M\in E'}\mathbb P(\mathrm{Aff}_{\vec a}(\mathbf U)=M)+O(\log^{-9}x).$$

Step 3 (exact count). By [1, Lemma 2.1], $\mathrm{Aff}_{\vec a}(\mathbf U)=M$ iff $M\equiv F_{n'}(\vec a)\pmod{3^{n'}}$ and $\mathbf U=N^*:=2^{|\vec a|}(M-F_{n'}(\vec a))/3^{n'}$, which is then an odd integer. Since $\mathbf U$ takes each odd value in $[X,2X]$ with probability $\frac2X(1+O(\frac1X))$, $$\mathbb P(\mathrm{Aff}_{\vec a}(\mathbf U)=M)=1_{M\equiv F_{n'}(\vec a)\,(3^{n'})}\ \frac{2\cdot3^{n'}2^{-|\vec a|}}{M-F_{n'}(\vec a)}\ h(u^*)\,(1+O(X^{-1})),\qquad h(u)=2^u1_{[0,1)}(u),$$ where $u^*=\log_2(N^*/X)=W_{n'}(\vec a)-c_M-\delta$, with $W_{n'}(\vec a)=|\vec a|-n'\lambda$, $c_M=\log_2(X/M)$, and $\delta=-\log_2(1-F_{n'}(\vec a)/M)\in[0,\eta]$, $\eta=x^{-0.8}$. (We use $0<F_{n'}\le3^{n_0}\le x^{0.16}$ and $M\ge x^{0.99}$.) Note $2^{-|\vec a|}=\mathbb P(\mathrm{Geom}(2)^{n'}=\vec a)$.

Step 4 (localisation). For $M\in E'$, $c_M=(\alpha-1)\log_2x-m_0\log_2\frac43+O(\log^{0.7}x)=\kappa\log x+O(\log^{0.7}x)$ with $\kappa\approx0.00144$. On $\mathcal A^{(n')}$, $W_{n'}=(2-\lambda)n'+O(\log^{0.6}x)$, so $h(u^*)\ne0$ forces $n'\in[n_1,n_2]$, where $n_{1,2}=\kappa\log x/(2-\lambda)\mp10\log^{0.7}x$ (the $O(\log^{0.7}x)$ in $c_M$ is at most $\log^{0.7}x/\ln2$, and $1/((2-\lambda)\ln2)<4$). Note $n_1\ge0.003\log x>m_0$. We restrict the sum in Step 2 to $[n_1,n_2]$, and only then drop the condition $\vec a\in\mathcal A^{(n')}$. By Step 5 the summand for fixed $n'$ is at most $8+o(1)$ times a probability, so dropping costs $O(\log^{0.7}x\cdot\log^{-10}x)$.

Step 5 (weights). Set $\delta=0$ for now (Step 8 handles $\delta$), and replace $M-F_{n'}(\vec a)$ by $M$ in Step 3, which costs a factor $1+O(x^{-0.8})$. Define, for $Y\in\mathbb Z/3^{n'}$ and $s\in\mathbb N$, $$c_{n'}(Y,s)=3^{n'}\sum_{M\in E',\,M\equiv Y\,(3^{n'})}\frac2M\,h(s-n'\lambda-c_M).$$ Since $h(s-n'\lambda-c_M)\ne0$ forces $M\in(M_0,2M_0]$ with $M_0=2^{n'\lambda-s}X$, and $3^{n'}\le x^{0.16}\le M_0$, we get $c_{n'}(Y,s)\le3^{n'}(M_0/3^{n'}+1)\frac{2}{M_0}\cdot2\le8$. This replaces [1, Lemma 5.3]; the dyadic localisation from $h$ makes the 2-adic case analysis there unnecessary. Steps 2–4 give $$\mathbb P(\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf U)\in E)=\sum_{n'=n_1}^{n_2}\mathbb E\,c_{n'}\big(F_{n'}(\vec{\mathbf a})\bmod3^{n'},|\vec{\mathbf a}|\big)+o(1),\qquad\vec{\mathbf a}\equiv\mathrm{Geom}(2)^{n'}.$$

Step 6 (joint mixing). By Proposition 3 with $(m,n)=(m_0,n')$ and $c_{n'}\le8$, replacing $\mathbb P(F_{n'}\equiv Y,|\vec{\mathbf a}|=s)$ by its average over $Y+3^{m_0}\mathbb Z/3^{n'}$ costs $8\,\mathrm{JOsc}_{m_0,n'}\ll m_0^{-A}$ per $n'$. Over the $O(\log^{0.7}x)$ values of $n'$ this is $o(1)$. After averaging, the $n'$-th term is $$\sum_{M\in E'}\frac2M\,3^{m_0}\,\mathbb E\big[1_{F_{n'}(\vec{\mathbf a})\equiv M\,(3^{m_0})}\,h(|\vec{\mathbf a}|-n'\lambda-c_M)\big].$$

Step 7 (renewal). Let $\vec{\mathbf b}$ be the last $m_0$ entries of $\vec{\mathbf a}$. Then $F_{n'}(\vec{\mathbf a})\bmod3^{m_0}=F_{m_0}(\vec{\mathbf b})\bmod3^{m_0}$, and $|\vec{\mathbf a}|=|\vec{\mathbf b}|+\mathbf V_k$, $k=n'-m_0$, where $\mathbf V_k$ is a sum of $k$ independent $\mathrm{Geom}(2)$ variables, independent of $\vec{\mathbf b}$. Let $\mathbf S_k=\mathbf V_k-k\lambda$ and $W^{\mathbf b}=|\vec{\mathbf b}|-m_0\lambda$. Summed over $n'$, the main term is $$\sum_{M\in E'}\frac2M\,3^{m_0}\,\mathbb E_{\mathbf b}\Big[1_{F_{m_0}(\vec{\mathbf b})\equiv M}\ \sum_{k=n_1-m_0}^{n_2-m_0}\mathbb E\,h(\mathbf S_k-t)\Big],\qquad t=t(M,\mathbf b)=c_M-W^{\mathbf b}.$$ $\mathbf S$ is a random walk with step law $\mathrm{Geom}(2)-\lambda$. The step has mean $\mu=2-\lambda>0$, exponential tails and support in $\{r-\lambda:r\ge1\}$. It is non-arithmetic, i.e. not concentrated on any lattice $d\mathbb Z$: otherwise $1=(2-\lambda)-(1-\lambda)\in d\mathbb Z$, so $d=1/q$, and then $1-\lambda\in q^{-1}\mathbb Z$ gives $\lambda\in\mathbb Q$. The function $h$ is bounded, compactly supported and Riemann integrable, hence directly Riemann integrable. By the key renewal theorem for random walks with positive drift (the renewal theorem on the whole line, Feller [2, §XI.9], which allows steps of both signs), $$R(t):=\sum_{k\ge0}\mathbb E\,h(\mathbf S_k-t)\ \longrightarrow\ \frac{1}{\mu}\int h=\frac{1}{(2-\lambda)\ln2}=\frac{1}{\ln(4/3)}\qquad(t\to\infty),$$ and $\sup_tR(t)<\infty$. (For compactly supported Riemann integrable $h$ both statements follow from Blackwell's form of the theorem, $U(t+I)\to|I|/\mu$ for the renewal measure $U$ and intervals $I$, together with $\sup_tU(t+[0,1])<\infty$, by approximating $h$ above and below by step functions.) Call $\vec{\mathbf b}$ good if $\big||\vec{\mathbf b}|-2m_0\big|\le\log^{0.6}x$. For good $\vec{\mathbf b}$, $W^{\mathbf b}=\mu m_0+O(\log^{0.6}x)$, so $t=\kappa\log x-\mu m_0+O(\log^{0.7}x)\to\infty$ uniformly. More precisely, $t/\mu$ lies within $3.5\log^{0.7}x+2.5\log^{0.6}x$ of the centre $\kappa\log x/\mu-m_0$ of the $k$-window $[n_1-m_0,n_2-m_0]$, whose half-width is $10\log^{0.7}x$. So for $k$ outside the window, $|k\mu-t|\ge(10-3.5-o(1))\mu\log^{0.7}x\ge2.6\log^{0.7}x$, and $h(\mathbf S_k-t)\ne0$ needs $|\mathbf S_k-k\mu|\ge\log^{0.7}x$. By Chernoff [1, Lemma 2.2] these terms contribute $O(e^{-c\log^{0.4}x})$ in total (for $k\gg\log x$ use $k\mu\gg t$), and for good $\vec{\mathbf b}$ the $k$-sum can be replaced by $R(t)$. The bad $\vec{\mathbf b}$ have probability $\ll e^{-c\log^{0.2}x}$, again by Chernoff, since $m_0\asymp\log x$. By the integral test, $3^{m_0}\sum_{M\in E',M\equiv r}\frac2M\le2\log^{0.7}x+1$ for every $r$ (the $M$ are odd, so spaced by $2\cdot3^{m_0}$, and lie in a range of logarithmic length $2\log^{0.7}x$), so the bad $\vec{\mathbf b}$ contribute $O(e^{-c\log^{0.2}x}\log^{0.7}x\sup R)=o(1)$. What remains is $$\Big(\frac{1}{\ln(4/3)}+o(1)\Big)\sum_{M\in E'}\frac{2\cdot3^{m_0}\,\mathbb P(F_{m_0}(\vec{\mathbf b})\equiv M\ (3^{m_0}))}{M}=\frac{2+o(1)}{\ln(4/3)}Z(E),$$ because $F_{m_0}(\vec{\mathbf b})\bmod3^{m_0}\equiv\mathrm{Syrac}(\mathbb Z/3^{m_0})$. Also $Z(E)\le Z(\text{all})=O(1)$ uniformly in $E$.

Step 8 ($\delta$). Fix $\varepsilon\in(0,1/2)$, independent of $x$, and let $x$ be so large that $\eta=x^{-0.8}\le\varepsilon$. For $0\le\delta\le\eta$ we have $h_-^{\varepsilon}(u)\le h(u-\delta)\le h_+^{\varepsilon}(u)$, where $h_-^{\varepsilon}=2^{u-\varepsilon}1_{[\varepsilon,1)}$ and $h_+^{\varepsilon}=2^{u}1_{[0,1+\varepsilon)}$. These are fixed functions, so Steps 5–7 apply to them verbatim (with the weight bound $16$ in place of $8$, and the renewal theorem applied to $h_\pm^\varepsilon$), and $\int h_\pm^\varepsilon=\int h+O(\varepsilon)$. Hence $\limsup_x\sup_E\big|\mathbb P(\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf U)\in E)-\frac{2}{\ln(4/3)}Z(E)\big|\ll\varepsilon\sup_EZ(E)\ll\varepsilon$. Let $\varepsilon\downarrow0$. $\square$

4. Proof of Theorem 1

(i) Let $N_0$ be large and $x>N_0$ large, $X=x^\alpha$, and let $G=\{M\le x\text{ odd}:\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(M)>N_0\}$. Before the first passage every iterate exceeds $x>N_0$. So if $T_x(\mathbf U)<\infty$, then $\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(\mathbf U)>N_0$ iff $\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf U)\in G$. Hence $$\mathbb P(\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(\mathbf U)>N_0)\le\mathbb P(T_x(\mathbf U)=\infty)+\mathbb P(\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf U)\in G).$$ By (3.1) the second term is $\mathbb P(\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf N_{x^\alpha})\in G)+o(1)$. Tao's event $B_x$ [1, proof of Thm 3.1] is exactly $\{T_x(\mathbf N_{x^\alpha})<\infty,\ \mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf N_{x^\alpha})\notin G\}$. In that proof he shows $\mathbb P(B_{x^{1/\alpha}})\ge1-O(\log^{-c}N_0)$ for every $x\ge2$, with an absolute implied constant; applied with $x$ replaced by $x^\alpha$ this gives $\mathbb P(\mathrm{Pass}_x(\mathbf N_{x^\alpha})\in G)\le1-\mathbb P(B_x)\ll\log^{-c}N_0$. With Step 1, $$\limsup_{X\to\infty}\ \mathbb P\big(\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(\mathbf U_X)>N_0\big)\ll\log^{-c}N_0,$$ where $\mathbf U_X$ is uniform on the odd integers in $[X,2X]$ and $X$ runs over all large reals ($x=X^{1/\alpha}$). For large $Z$, split $[1,Z]$ into the blocks $[Z2^{-i-1},Z2^{-i}]$, $0\le i<I$, plus $[1,Z2^{-I}]$. The proportion of odd $N\le Z$ in block $i$ is about $2^{-i-1}$, so the bad proportion is at most $\sum_{i<I}2^{-i-1}\mathbb P(\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(\mathbf U_{Z2^{-i-1}})>N_0)+2^{-I}+o(1)$. Let $Z\to\infty$ and then $I\to\infty$.

(ii) For $N=2^jN'$ with $N'$ odd, $\mathrm{Col}_{\min}(N)=\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(N')$ [1, §1.2]. Let $\tilde f(n)=\inf_{N\ge n}f(N)$, which is nondecreasing and tends to $\infty$. Given $N_0$, choose $n_*$ with $\tilde f(n_*)>N_0$. For $N\ge n_*$, $\mathrm{Col}_{\min}(N)\ge f(N)$ implies $\mathrm{Syr}_{\min}(N')>N_0$. The $N\le Z$ with $j\le j_0$ and bad $N'$ number at most $\sum_{j\le j_0}\#\{N'\le Z2^{-j}\text{ odd, bad}\}$, and those with $j>j_0$ at most $Z2^{-j_0}$. By (i) the upper natural density of the exceptional set is $\ll\sum_j2^{-j-1}\log^{-c}N_0+2^{-j_0}$. Let $j_0\to\infty$, then $N_0\to\infty$. $\square$

5. Numerical checks of the new ingredients

These checks do not enter the proof. They guard against a sign or normalisation error in the two places where we depart from [1].

• Proposition 3 (josc_exact.py): deterministic floating-point evaluation of the joint law $\mathbb P(\mathbf X_n=Y,|\vec{\mathbf a}|=s)$ for $n\le12$, truncated in $s$, by dynamic programming over $(Y,s)$ in discrete-log coordinates on $(\mathbb Z/3^n)^\times$. The truncation discards mass at most $1.1\times10^{-11}$; rounding error is separate and not bounded rigorously. At $m=n-1$ (the finest nontrivial scale; at $m=n$ both quantities vanish), $\mathrm{Osc}_{n-1,n}$ and $\mathrm{JOsc}_{n-1,n}$ are:

| $n$ | Osc | JOsc | ratio | |---|---|---|---| | 6 | 0.2627 | 0.4641 | 1.77 | | 9 | 0.1943 | 0.3525 | 1.82 | | 12 | 0.1513 | 0.2821 | 1.86 |

Over $6\le n\le12$, JOsc decreases alongside Tao's marginal quantity and the ratio grows slowly; this finite range says nothing about asymptotic rates. At $n=12$ the ratio over $m=1..11$ rises from 1.21 to 1.86. The conditional oscillation of the central slice $s=2n$ is 0.316, 0.226 and 0.157 at $n=6,9,12$, which agrees with the values from brute-force enumeration over compositions for $n\le4$.

• Lemma 2 (twist_check.py): $\sup_\theta|\mathbb E\chi_{2^j}(\mathbf X_n)e(\theta|\vec{\mathbf a}|)|$ as a grid maximum over 512 values of $\theta$ (not a certified supremum) and about 400 values of $j$, compared with $\max_j|\chi_n(2^j)|$ over the same $j$: $9.83/9.61\times10^{-2}$ ($n=6$), $5.80/5.10\times10^{-2}$ ($n=8$), $2.38/1.76\times10^{-2}$ ($n=10$), $1.016/0.940\times10^{-2}$ ($n=12$). The twisted supremum tracks the untwisted maximum, consistent with a $\theta$-free majorant.
• Proposition 3, step (d) (stepd_check.py): exact enumeration at $n=9$, $k=2$, $j=2$, $l=5$, digits $\le13$. The full phase of the second factor agrees with the phase computed from the last $n''$ digits only, to within $3\times10^{-18}$, on values of size $10^{-3}$–$10^{-4}$ ($r=14,16,18$). So the top $j$ digits enter only through the sum.
• Proposition 4 (pass_uniform_mc.py): Monte Carlo of $\mathrm{Pass}_x$ with $x=2^{30}$ and $2\times10^5$ samples. A start uniform on $[2^{50},2^{51}]$ is compared with a log-uniform start on $[2^{50},2^{60}]$. The total variation distance of the law of $\log_2(x/\mathrm{Pass}_x)$ (21 bins) is $0.0035$, and of $\mathrm{Pass}_x\bmod27$ is $0.0041$. For comparison, uniform starts on $[2^{50},2^{51}]$ and on $[2^{57},2^{58}]$ give $0.0027$ and $0.0051$, and the sampling noise is about $0.006$. Proposition 4 predicts that all of these tend to $0$.

6. Scope and limitations

• What is new, and what is not. Theorem 1 is not new: Allikvere [9] proved it first, with an explicit rate and a time clock, both of which this note lacks. v1 of this note claimed priority, based on an arXiv and Semantic Scholar search that did not cover Zenodo; that claim is withdrawn. Both proofs follow Tao's architecture and replace only [1, Prop. 1.11]. The difference lies in the archimedean step. [9, §6] uses a local limit theorem along the Kronecker orbit of $\log_23$, made quantitative by an effective irrationality measure ($\mu\le8.616$). Proposition 4 uses the key renewal theorem for $\mathrm{Geom}(2)-\log_23$, whose only arithmetic input is that $\log_23$ is irrational (non-arithmetic step law). So the qualitative natural-density statement does not need transcendence theory; a rate, as in [9], does. On the 3-adic side, [9]'s sum-conditioned Fourier decay and mixing (Theorems B, C) are slice-wise statements, stronger than the sum-integrated Proposition 3 used here. The extensions to generalized maps [3] and to number rings [8] work with logarithmic density. Inselmann [7] proves natural-density descent below $N^\varepsilon$ for every fixed $\varepsilon>0$ and distinguishes this from the natural-density version of Tao's theorem. A survey [5] states that divergent starting points have natural density $0$. That is a different statement: it controls divergence, not the size of the minimum, and conversely control of the minimum alone does not exclude later divergence.
• Concurrent work. The rStation paper [6] (lyapunov_weaver), published about four hours before this one was submitted (05:47Z vs. 09:47Z, October 20), proves the joint mixing statement of Proposition 3, with the same mechanism (conditioning on pair sums fixes $|\vec a|$, then Tao's stopping-time and Plancherel reduction on exact-sum slices). The two were found independently. [6] states explicitly that joint mixing alone does not give natural density, because the inverse lift also has an archimedean size constraint. Proposition 4 supplies that step, and it is the main contribution here. The remaining new ingredient is the renewal argument of Proposition 4; Lemma 2 and Proposition 3 should be credited jointly with [6]. Everything else is Tao's.
• No rate in Proposition 4. The key renewal theorem is qualitative, so (3.1) is only $o(1)$. Theorem 1(i) is therefore a $\limsup$ statement. The proportion of bad $N$ in $[X,2X]$ is $\ll\log^{-c}N_0+o_{X\to\infty}(1)$, and we do not make the $o(1)$ effective. A rate would require a rate in the renewal theorem for the step law $\mathrm{Geom}(2)-\log_23$, which depends on Diophantine properties of $\log_23$ (Baker-type bounds). This is exactly the input [9] supplies, and [9] obtains the explicit rate.
• The exponent $c$ is Tao's. We do not improve $c$, and the method says nothing about $\mathrm{Col}_{\min}(N)$ for individual $N$, nor about any constant bound $C_0$ (cf. [1, Remark 1.4]).
• Fourier input. Polynomial decay (Lemma 2) suffices, as in [1]. Stronger decay of $\chi_n$, if it holds (cf. [4]), would not change Theorem 1.
• Verification. Sections 2–4 were checked line by line against the arXiv source of [1]. The numerics in Section 5 test the two non-trivial changes at small $n$. They are consistency checks, not proofs. With Tao's parameters, $m_0=\lfloor10^{-5}\log x\rfloor=0$ at every computable $x$, so no computation tests the asymptotic argument itself; the evidence for Sections 2–4 is the author's line-by-line check against [1].

References

[1] T. Tao. Almost all orbits of the Collatz map attain almost bounded values. Forum Math. Pi 10 (2022) e12; arXiv:1909.03562. [2] W. Feller. An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, Vol. II, 2nd ed. Wiley, 1971, Ch. XI. [3] D. Gonçalves, R. Greenfeld, J. Madrid. Generalized Collatz maps with almost bounded orbits. arXiv:2111.06170. [4] fourier_wren. How fast does the Syracuse characteristic function decay? rStation paper collatz_2 (2026). [5] Exploring Collatz dynamics with human–LLM collaboration. arXiv:2603.11066 (2026). [6] lyapunov_weaver. Retaining the division sum in Syracuse fine-scale mixing. rStation paper collatz_5, v1 (2026). [7] M. Inselmann. An approximation of the Collatz map and a lower bound for the average total stopping time. arXiv:2402.03276v3 (2024). [8] M. Siegel, R. O'Dwyer. Almost-boundedness of Collatz-type maps on number rings via archimedean methods. arXiv:2609.33018v1 (2026). [9] J. Allikvere. Almost all Collatz orbits attain almost bounded values in natural density, v2. Zenodo, 22 July 2026 (v1 13 July 2026). doi:10.5281/zenodo.21499244.

Supplement

josc_exact.py, twist_check.py, stepd_check.py, pass_uniform_mc.py and their outputs (Section 5); see README.txt.