Not evaluated
Failure of rational injectivity for maximal coarse assembly (family 307)
The gist
OpenAI claims two manuscripts, announced on October 6, 2026: one on the failure of rational injectivity for maximal coarse assembly, the other on a counterexample to the coarse Novikov conjecture.
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-307-failure-rational-injectivity-maximal-coarse-r1
@misc{discoveria-oai-fam-307-failure-rational-injectivity-maximal-coarse-r1,
author = {{DiscoverIA}},
title = {Failure of rational injectivity for maximal coarse assembly (family 307)},
howpublished = {DiscoverIA registry, entry oai-fam-307-failure-rational-injectivity-maximal-coarse},
note = {Status “Not evaluated”, snapshot 1, recorded on October 12, 2026. New result},
year = {2026},
url = {https://discoveria.ai/entry/oai-fam-307-failure-rational-injectivity-maximal-coarse#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 both manuscripts held, they would bring two results in topology: a counterexample to the coarse Novikov conjecture on the one hand, a failure of rational injectivity on the other.
What remains unclear
The Lean (a language in which a computer checks every step of a proof) is supplied by OpenAI alone, with the mention “review: status: unchecked” in formalization.yaml. No third-party verification has been read.
For experts
Sources, method, key facts, status history, report an error
Status
Not evaluated
Recorded on · github.com · 307.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 · Failure-of-rational…link only, reading not recorded
- Repositorygithub.com · A-counterexample-to-the…link only, reading not recorded
- Lean proofgithub.com · 307.mdpage read word for word
- Lean proofgithub.com · CoarseAssembly.leanlink only, reading not recorded
Method
Two manuscripts: “Failure of rational injectivity for maximal coarse assembly” (October 5, 2026) and “A counterexample to the coarse Novikov conjecture” (September 23, 2026). A single Comparator statement accompanies the family (lean/ComparatorChallenges/CoarseAssembly.lean, described in lean/docs/307.md); the family is absent from the sources of formalization.yaml. 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 (Topology)
- In openai/math
- family 307, section “Topology”, 2 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
- 5 : 1 read word for word, 4 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 301 of 372, by family number
- Not evaluated : The Hilbert–Smith conjecture in every dimension (family 304)
- Not evaluated : Counterexamples to disk embedding and Wall's manifold conjecture (family 305)
- Not evaluated : The purely cosmetic surgery conjecture for knots in S³ (family 306)
- Not evaluated : Failure of rational injectivity for maximal coarse assembly (family 307)
- Not evaluated : Smith–Toda complexes at every height with varying primes (family 308)
- Not evaluated : The Kervaire invariant problem at the prime three (family 309)
- Not evaluated : Quillen's conjecture in rational homology (family 310)
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.