Not evaluated
A counterexample to the quadratic sensitivity conjecture (family 132)
The gist
On October 6, 2026, OpenAI announced, with an unreleased internal model, a manuscript on a superquadratic separation between sensitivity and block sensitivity.
DiscoverIA status on October 12, 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 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-oai-fam-132-counterexample-quadratic-sensitivity-r1
@misc{discoveria-oai-fam-132-counterexample-quadratic-sensitivity-r1,
author = {{DiscoverIA}},
title = {A counterexample to the quadratic sensitivity conjecture (family 132)},
howpublished = {DiscoverIA registry, entry oai-fam-132-counterexample-quadratic-sensitivity},
note = {Status “Not evaluated”, snapshot 1, recorded on October 12, 2026. New result},
year = {2026},
url = {https://discoveria.ai/entry/oai-fam-132-counterexample-quadratic-sensitivity#releve-1},
urldate = {2026-10-12}
}Dated link opens this snapshot in the history
To understand ≈ 30 s reading time, estimated
What it changes
The sensitivity of a function that answers yes or no from a string of bits is the maximum, over all inputs, of the number of bits whose single change alters the answer. Block sensitivity follows the same idea with disjoint blocks of bits: it is the maximum number of blocks whose simultaneous change alters the answer. If the manuscript held, the gap between these two measures would exceed a quadratic relation.
What remains unclear
The Lean (a language in which a computer checks every step of a proof) is supplied by OpenAI itself, and its tracking file carries the mention “unchecked”. No third-party verification is recorded. It is not known how far the Lean statement covers the manuscript.
For experts
Sources, method, key facts, status history, report an error
Status
Not evaluated
Recorded on · github.com · 132.md
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 sourcegithub.com · CONTENTS.mdlink only, reading not recorded
- Repositorygithub.com · A-superquadratic…link only, reading not recorded
- Lean proofgithub.com · 132.mdpage read word for word
- Lean proofgithub.com · SensitivitySeparation.leanlink only, reading not recorded
Method
The openai/math repository contains one manuscript, “A superquadratic separation between sensitivity and block sensitivity”, dated September 25, 2026. The file lean/docs/132.md describes the scope of the Lean formalisation, with 1 Comparator statement. The family is among the sources of formalization.yaml, and history.md reports no revision. DiscoverIA status: not evaluated, meaning that no third-party evaluation has been found in the sources read. Set on October 12, 2026 from github.com (page read, quotation checked word for word: “describes the scope of the Lean formalization”).
Limits
No named third party: the recorded checks come from the claimant or from a platform tool. The claimant supplies a Lean proof; as of this date, DiscoverIA has found no independent verification of this proof or of the result.
Key facts
- Claimed by
- OpenAI (unreleased internal model)
announced on Oct 6, 2026 - Nature
- new result
- Field
- Theoretical computer science
- In openai/math
- family 132, section “Theoretical computer science”, 1 manuscript dated Sep 25, 2026
- Lean proof
- supplied by the claimant, marked “unchecked” (not reviewed) in its repository
- Revisions
- none reported by the claimant
- Checked by
- claimant (Lean supplied, not checked by a third party)
- Sources
- 4 : 1 read word for word, 3 links only
- This entry
- AI draft, not reviewed
Status history
Only one observation so far.
- 01
First observation:Not evaluatedCurrent status
Family with a Lean proof supplied by the claimant. No third-party check read; the source marks this proof as not reviewed (“unchecked”).
Source: github.comread word for word
An observation is added; none is ever erased.
In the same set
openai/math: 719 manuscripts in 372 families from an unreleased internal model · entry 128 of 372, by family number
- Not evaluated : Exponential state costs for two-way automata (family 129)
- Not evaluated : Fourier transforms below n log n (family 130)
- Not evaluated : Polynomial mixing of graph switches with prescribed degrees (family 131)
- Not evaluated : A counterexample to the quadratic sensitivity conjecture (family 132)
- Not evaluated : The complexity of Weisfeiler–Leman refinement (family 133)
- Not evaluated : Generalized star height at most three (family 134)
- Not evaluated : Sharp homogeneous depth-five complexity of matrix products (family 135)
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.