Erdős problem #1054: partial result with a Lean proof according to the wiki (Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5 Pro, Principia Math)
Status
Not evaluated
Recorded on · github.com
- Announced
- Wiki frozen
- Recordednot evaluated
- nextTo follow
What this status means
Source reading : Source read word for word (level 3 of 3)
No DiscoverIA status yet; this does not mean nobody has checked it.
To move to “Under review”: a public review under way. To “Peer reviewed”: a journal publication or a review by named experts.
Dated archive: status recorded on the wiki frozen on Jun 30, 2026
The gist
The “AI contributions to Erdős problems” wiki, frozen on 30 June 2026, lists an AI contribution to Erdős problem #1054 as “Partial result (Lean)”.
Cite this entry
A single status snapshot since Oct 12, 2026: a citation always points to a dated snapshot.
Cite snapshot 1, Oct 12, 2026
APA citation with the dated link
BibTeX @misc, key discoveria-erdos-1054-claude-opus-4-8-gpt-5-5-pro-principia-math-1a-r1
@misc{discoveria-erdos-1054-claude-opus-4-8-gpt-5-5-pro-principia-math-1a-r1,
author = {{DiscoverIA}},
title = {Erdős problem #1054: partial result with a Lean proof according to the wiki (Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5 Pro, Principia Math)},
howpublished = {DiscoverIA registry, entry erdos-1054-claude-opus-4-8-gpt-5-5-pro-principia-math-1a},
note = {Status « Not evaluated », snapshot 1, recorded on October 12, 2026. new result},
year = {2026},
url = {https://discoveria.ai/en/fiche/erdos-1054-claude-opus-4-8-gpt-5-5-pro-principia-math-1a/#releve-1},
urldate = {2026-10-12}
}Dated link opens this snapshot in the history
Text produced by an automatic template (DiscoverIA pipeline), on Reviewed by: nobody yetReport an error
What has not been reviewed?
The status and its sources come from the registry; only the explanatory text has not been reviewed. A reported error is corrected, then the text is reviewed.
The status and its sources come from the registry; only the explanatory text has not been reviewed. A reported error is corrected, then the text is reviewed.
Key facts
- Claimed by
- Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5 Pro, Principia Math, selon le wiki IA d'Erdős
announced on Jun 22, 2026 - Nature
- new result
- Field
- Mathematics (Erdős problem #1054 (number theory ; divisors))
- Wiki category
- AI standalone (IA seule ; littérature comparable inconnue ; implication humaine non significative)
- Wiki verdict
- « Partial result (Lean) » : 🟡 progrès partiel (légende du wiki)
- According to erdosproblems.com
- problem still open (recorded on Oct 12, 2026)
- Checked by
- no verifier identified
- Sources (domains)
- 2 : 1 read word for word, 1 links only
- This entry
- AI draft, not reviewed
For experts
Sources(domains)
- primairegithub.compage read word for word · consulted on Oct 12, 2026
- listeerdosproblems.comlink only, reading not recorded
Method
Status “not evaluated” recorded on 12 October 2026 from github.com (page read, quotation checked word for word).
Limits
A Lean proof supplied by the claimant does not count as formal verification by a third party. DiscoverIA has recorded no independent evaluation as of this date.
In the same set
AI contributions to Erdős problems (wiki by T. Tao, frozen on 30 June 2026) · entry 448 of 521, by problem number
- Not evaluated : Erdős problem #1048: proof in Lean, a special case of a result of Pommerenke, according to the wiki (Aristotle)
- Not evaluated : Erdős n°1048 : formalisation par Aristotle (preuve : Pommerenke (1961))
- Not evaluated : Erdős problem #1051: full solution with a Lean proof according to the wiki (Aletheia)
- Not evaluated : Erdős problem #1054: partial result with a Lean proof according to the wiki (Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5 Pro, Principia Math)
- Not evaluated : Erdős problem #1061: candidate full solution according to the wiki (GPT)
- Not evaluated : Erdős problem #1062: partial result according to the wiki (GPT-5.4 Pro)
- Not evaluated : Erdős n°1067 : formalisation par Aleph Prover, Aristotle (preuve : Bowler and Pitz (2024))
Status history
Only one observation so far.
An observation is added; none is ever erased.
Report an error or suggest a source
Thank you, your message was sent.
Sending failed. Try again, or write to [email protected].