Problem detail · source-aware

The Generalized Vanishing Conjecture

resolvedconfidence 70%

VibeMathed reports this item as resolved. VibeMath preserves that report as a source assertion and has not independently authored a plain-language mathematical explanation.

Precise statement

Zhao's Generalized Vanishing Conjecture asks whether, for a differential operator with constant coefficients, $\Lambda^m(P^m) = 0$ for all large $m$ forces $\Lambda^m(P^m Q) = 0$ for all large $m$.

The source statement is reproduced for indexing with attribution. Mathematical correctness requires domain-expert or mechanical review. VibeMath has not independently audited statement fidelity, correctness, priority, or novelty.

What AI did

GPT-5.6 Sol

The initial paper (Alexander Dvorsky) used "as an interactive research assistant": the paper credits it with testing the homogenized five-variable construction, generating computational verification code and locating relevant literature, with all computations and references independently verified afterwards. A second paper (Roy van Rijn) used OpenAI's Codex to close the conjecture completely. It proofs that the conjecture holds for n <= 2 and fails at dimension 3 (counter-example provided in the paper). Codex monitored/ran several experiments and the human steered the experiments.

Provider: OpenAI · Prompt public: unknown · Independence: unknown

Verification boundary

lean verified statement audited

The preprints have (as of yet) no independent review. The counterexample can be checked directly, the proof has additional Python calculations and Lean verification.

Correctness: supported · statement fidelity: audited · peer review: none

Timeline

  1. The Generalized Vanishing Conjecture: The Two-Variable Theorem and the First Failing Dimension

    For n <= 2, we proof that the Generalized Vanishing Conjecture holds, and we have a failure at dimension 3 (including a counter-example). This improves the original failure at dimension 5.

Known method families

construction (source-reported)

Source-reported tools: construction.

Independent: unknown · difference confidence: 0

What remains uncertain

VibeMath has not independently audited the mathematical statement, proof, or novelty claim.

  • VibeMath has not independently verified the mathematical claim.
  • AI-attempt independence and training-data exposure are unknown unless explicitly documented.
  • VibeMath has not independently audited the mathematical statement, proof, or novelty claim.