Math-2221-A1 · revision r1 · on Math-2221

OpenAI claim summary for Math-2221

Literature report · LLM-generated · unknown ·

mathematicsTop Open Problemscontributionliterature_report

Literature report. The underlying work is credited to its authors. Automated screening checks form, honesty and scope, not correctness. Status at unsolvedmath.com: solved. Claims here do not change the source status.

Claim: literature report

Summary of a claim published in openai/math; not a claim by this platform.

The cited corollary determines the exact weak-recovery threshold (a-b)^2>3(a+2b), with impossibility at equality, for the symmetric equal-size three-community sparse SBM. The problem statement asks the threshold for all k>=3 and does not restrict to that three-community symmetric subclass. This entry records partial support; complete coverage of the question is not established by this catalogue.

Limitations: The linked openai/math material has not been examined or verified by the platform.

Manuscript

Contents
  1. 10 Lectures and 42 Open Problems — Detection Threshold for SBM for three of more communities
  2. OpenAI's claim
  3. Mathematical statement of the claimed result
  4. Result 1.
  5. Outline of the argument
  6. Formal verification
  7. Status caveat
  8. Sources

10 Lectures and 42 Open Problems — Detection Threshold for SBM for three of more communities

OpenAI's claim

OpenAI presents a mathematical result relevant to this question in the selected manuscript. Three-state symmetric broadcasting is claimed reconstructible precisely when $d\lambda^2>1$ on regular and observed Poisson trees, for both signs of the channel parameter.

Mathematical statement of the claimed result

Result 1.
The tree channel has three equally likely states and transition matrix with diagonal $(1+2\lambda)/3$ and off-diagonal $(1-\lambda)/3$, so $-1/2\le\lambda\le1$. On a regular tree with branching $b\ge2$, or a Poisson Galton--Watson tree of mean $d>1$, the claim gives \[ \text{reconstruction}\quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad d\lambda^2>1, \qquad d=b\text{ in the regular case}, \] with nonreconstruction at admissible equality. The SBM corollary fixes $a,b>0$, $(a+2b)/3>1$, assigns independent uniform labels in $\{1,2,3\}$, and uses edge probabilities $a/n$ within a label and $b/n$ across labels. For overlap maximized over label permutations, it claims \[ (a-b)^2\le3(a+2b)\ \Longrightarrow\ \mathbb E\operatorname{ov}(\sigma,\widehat\sigma_n)\to1/3 \] for every estimator from the graph and independent randomness. Under the strict reverse inequality, some $O(n\log n)$ algorithm achieves overlap at least $1/3+\varepsilon$ with probability tending to one. These SBM statements retain the mean-degree assumption. Reconstruction means $\lim_{\ell\to\infty}a_\ell>0$, where \[ a_\ell=\mathbb E\left\|\mathbb P(\sigma_{\varnothing}\in\cdot\mid T_{\le\ell},\sigma_{\partial T_\ell})-\operatorname{Unif}\{1,2,3\}\right\|_{\mathrm{TV}}. \] The tree shape in the conditioning is unlabelled. In the Galton--Watson case the expectation includes extinct trees; it is not conditioned on survival.

Outline of the argument

The posterior is represented by a complex mean and two invariant statistics. Fixed-point inequalities separately exclude positive and negative threshold reconstruction, and an exact finite certificate treats the coloring boundary; known transfer theorems then give the corresponding three-community graph recovery threshold.

Formal verification

For family 229, the three-state Comparator entries only establish reconstruction when $d\lambda^2>1$. They omit threshold nonreconstruction, the graph recovery corollary, and the four-state companions. The listed Comparator files are ThreeStateSupercritical.lean, ThreeStateTreeClauses.lean. The inventory does not supply a named declaration for these Comparator entries. This site has not executed the Lean code. The scope descriptions do not certify the remaining manuscript arguments.

Status caveat

OpenAI attributes these manuscripts to work by an internal model. Its release cautions that arguments without formalization can contain mistakes. This catalogue has not independently checked the proofs; the labels report the mathematical claims attributed to OpenAI.

Sources