AI claims on Erdős problems judged to have major gaps by the Erdős AI wiki (358, 963; 1040 in part)
Status
Contested
Recorded on · github.com
Outside the verification path
- Announced
- Recordedcontested
- nextTo follow
What this status means
Source reading : Source read word for word (level 3 of 3)
Sourced public objection, with no established refutation.
It stays “Contested” until a refutation is established. It would become “Withdrawn” if its author withdrew it or the reference source marked it incorrect.
The gist
The wiki of AI contributions to Erdős problems judges claims on problems 358 and 963 to have major gaps, and the one on 1040 to be partly wrong, in January and February 2026.
Cite this entry
A single status snapshot since Oct 18, 2026: a citation always points to a dated snapshot.
Cite snapshot 1, Oct 18, 2026
APA citation with the dated link
BibTeX @misc, key discoveria-erdos-wiki-major-gaps-claims-r1
@misc{discoveria-erdos-wiki-major-gaps-claims-r1,
author = {{DiscoverIA}},
title = {AI claims on Erdős problems judged to have major gaps by the Erdős AI wiki (358, 963; 1040 in part)},
howpublished = {DiscoverIA registry, entry erdos-wiki-major-gaps-claims},
note = {Status « Contested », snapshot 1, recorded on October 18, 2026. new result},
year = {2026},
url = {https://discoveria.ai/en/fiche/erdos-wiki-major-gaps-claims/#releve-1},
urldate = {2026-10-18}
}Dated link opens this snapshot in the history
Text written by an AI (DiscoverIA pipeline), on Reviewed by: Antoine Olivier, Oct 18, 2026Report an error
What has not been reviewed?
The status and its sources come from the registry; the explanatory text has been reviewed by a human.
The status and its sources come from the registry; the explanatory text has been reviewed by a human.
Key facts
- Claimed by
- divers (GPT-5.2 Pro, GPT-5.2 Thinking, Gemini 3 Pro, Aletheia), dont une contribution humaine avec IA
announced on Jan 2026 - Nature
- new result
- Field
- Mathematics
- Checked by
- wiki maintainers
- Sources (domains)
- 1 : 1 links only
- This entry
- Reviewed by Antoine Olivier, Oct 18, 2026
To understand
Analogy
Picture an exam paper where the marker has written in the margin that steps are missing and no conclusion can be drawn.
What it changes
An argument with gaps is not an established error: it may be completed or fall. This batch keeps a record of AI claims that the wiki does not accept as they stand.
What remains unclear
The sources read do not say which steps are missing, nor whether the authors have completed their arguments. The wiki has not been updated since 30 June 2026.
1 source.
For experts
Sources(domains)
- primairegithub.comlink only, reading not recorded
Method
The batch gathers the wiki's “Argument with major gaps made” rows for problem 358 (GPT-5.2 Pro on 11 February 2026, then GPT-5.2 Thinking from 13 to 20 February 2026, with a human contribution) and problem 963 (Gemini 3 Pro, 22 January 2026). For 1040, Aletheia solved one part of the problem and the wiki judges the solution to the other part incorrect. Status “contested” recorded on 18 October 2026 from github.com (page read, quotation checked word for word).
Limits
The status may change if a new source is published; the dated history stays visible.
Picture an exam paper where the marker has written in the margin that steps are missing and no conclusion can be drawn.
Status history
Only one observation so far.
- 01
First observation:ContestedCurrent status
split from the batch of proofs the wiki marks incorrect: gaps are not an established error, so the status stays contested; problem #1040 keeps the classification of its row…
Read the full reason
split from the batch of proofs the wiki marks incorrect: gaps are not an established error, so the status stays contested; problem #1040 keeps the classification of its row (contested)
Source: github.comread word for word
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].