Not evaluated
Massive continuum limits and exact mass asymptotics for planar O(n) models (family 215)
The gist
OpenAI claims, in five manuscripts announced on October 6, 2026, results on the continuum limit and the mass of two-dimensional O(n) models, notably O(3) and O(4).
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-215-massive-continuum-limits-exact-mass-r1
@misc{discoveria-oai-fam-215-massive-continuum-limits-exact-mass-r1,
author = {{DiscoverIA}},
title = {Massive continuum limits and exact mass asymptotics for planar O(n) models (family 215)},
howpublished = {DiscoverIA registry, entry oai-fam-215-massive-continuum-limits-exact-mass},
note = {Status “Not evaluated”, snapshot 1, recorded on October 12, 2026. New result},
year = {2026},
url = {https://discoveria.ai/entry/oai-fam-215-massive-continuum-limits-exact-mass#releve-1},
urldate = {2026-10-12}
}Dated link opens this snapshot in the history
To understand ≈ 20 s reading time, estimated
What it changes
If the manuscripts hold, they would provide a massive continuum limit of the O(3) model and an exact asymptotic behaviour of the mass of the O(4) model. One more manuscript would concern exponential decay in two-dimensional classical O(n) models.
What remains unclear
It is not known whether a third party has evaluated these manuscripts: no evaluation is recorded in the sources read. The Lean (a language in which a computer checks every step of a proof) is supplied by OpenAI itself, and formalization.yaml marks its review as 'unchecked'.
For experts
Sources, method, key facts, status history, report an error
Status
Not evaluated
Recorded on · github.com · 215.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 · The-canonical-massive…link only, reading not recorded
- Repositorygithub.com · An-Isolated-Particle-Pole…link only, reading not recorded
- Repositorygithub.com · Exact-mass-asymptotics…link only, reading not recorded
- Repositorygithub.com · Sharp-mass-bounds-for-the…link only, reading not recorded
- Repositorygithub.com · Exponential-decay-in-two…link only, reading not recorded
- Lean proofgithub.com · 215.mdpage read word for word
- Lean proofgithub.com · ClassicalON.leanlink only, reading not recorded
Method
OpenAI's repository holds five manuscripts, dated September 23, October 4 and October 5, 2026. For O(3): a canonical continuum limit and an isolated particle pole; for O(4): exact asymptotics and 'sharp' mass bounds; for O(n): exponential decay. The file lean/docs/215.md describes the scope of the Lean formalisation, with 1 Comparator statement. 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
- Mathematics (Probability and statistical mechanics)
- In openai/math
- family 215, section “Probability and statistical mechanics”, 5 manuscripts dated Sep 23, 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
- 8 : 1 read word for word, 7 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 209 of 372, by family number
- Not evaluated : No bigeodesics and smooth limit shapes in planar first-passage percolation (family 212)
- Not evaluated : No infinite critical clusters on quasi-transitive graphs (family 213)
- Not evaluated : The Benjamini–Schramm nonuniqueness conjecture (family 214)
- Not evaluated : Massive continuum limits and exact mass asymptotics for planar O(n) models (family 215)
- Not evaluated : Critical logarithmic corrections and BKT scaling for the planar XY model (family 216)
- Not evaluated : The low-temperature Sherrington–Kirkpatrick fluctuation law (family 217)
- Not evaluated : Conformal universality for weakly interacting and disordered Ising models (family 218)
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.