Not evaluated
Non-zero single-minus gluon amplitudes: formula by GPT-5.2 Pro
Non-zero single-minus gluon tree amplitudes: formula proposed by GPT-5.2 Pro
The gist
OpenAI and researchers from IAS, Vanderbilt, Cambridge and Harvard announced on February 13, 2026 a theoretical physics formula proposed by GPT-5.2 Pro. Status: not yet assessed.
DiscoverIA status on October 11, 2026: not evaluated, meaning no third-party evaluation found.
AI draft, not reviewedWhat has not been reviewed?
Text written by an AI (DiscoverIA pipeline), on . 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.
Cite this entry
A single status snapshot since Oct 11, 2026: a citation always points to a dated snapshot.
Cite snapshot 1, Oct 11, 2026
APA citation with the dated link
BibTeX @misc, key discoveria-gpt52-gluon-amplitudes-2026-02-13-r1
@misc{discoveria-gpt52-gluon-amplitudes-2026-02-13-r1,
author = {{DiscoverIA}},
title = {Non-zero single-minus gluon tree amplitudes: formula proposed by GPT-5.2 Pro},
howpublished = {DiscoverIA registry, entry gpt52-gluon-amplitudes-2026-02-13},
note = {Status “Not evaluated”, snapshot 1, recorded on October 11, 2026. New result},
year = {2026},
url = {https://discoveria.ai/entry/gpt52-gluon-amplitudes-2026-02-13#releve-1},
urldate = {2026-10-11}
}Dated link opens this snapshot in the history
To understand ≈ 20 s reading time, estimated
What it changes
Gluons are the particles that carry the strong force, and an amplitude is used to compute the likelihood of an interaction. If the result holds, an AI would have suggested a formula for amplitudes shown to be non-zero, and an internal model would then have supplied the proof.
What remains unclear
The proof was verified by the authors, some of them affiliated with OpenAI; no third party was found. The identifier of the arXiv preprint was not recorded.
For experts
Sources, method, key facts, status history, report an error
Status
Not evaluated
Recorded on · openai.com
Step 1 of 4 on the scale: not evaluated. Next step: under review.
- Announced
- Recordednot evaluated
- nextTo follow
What this status means
Source reading : Source read word for word (level 3 of 3)
The result is declared neither right nor wrong.
To move to “Under review”: a public review under way. To “Peer reviewed”: a journal publication or a review by named experts.
Sources
- Main sourceopenai.compage read word for word
Method
DiscoverIA status: not evaluated, meaning that no third-party evaluation has been found in the sources read. Set on October 11, 2026 from openai.com (page read, quotation checked word for word: “later proved by an internal OpenAI model and verified by the authors”).
Limits
DiscoverIA has not checked this result itself.
Key facts
- Claimed by
- OpenAI with IAS, Vanderbilt, Cambridge, Harvard
announced on Feb 13, 2026 - Nature
- new result
- Field
- Physics (theoretical physics)
- Checked by
- the authors (including OpenAI affiliates); no third party found
- Sources
- 1 : 1 read word for word
- This entry
- AI draft, not reviewed
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 contact@discoveria.ai.
Is your result listed?What each status requires, correcting this entry, replying to it.