Problem packetResearch packetR687
Published binary formulas do not settle the signed determinant
Link to a section
The record cites sources for its explanation.
Recorded status: established
Recorded scope: the literature comparison for the signed sequence in the candidate
Complete recorded scope and conditions
{
"kind": "universal",
"statement": "the literature comparison for the signed sequence in the candidate"
}Originating problem: Nonvanishing of Rudin-Shapiro Hankel determinants
Authored record and scope
- Authored title
- Published binary formulas do not settle the signed determinant
- Record type
- claim
- Stored status
- established
- Evidence grade
- sourced
- Recorded scope data
- { "kind": "universal", "statement": "the literature comparison for the signed sequence in the candidate" }
2Authored explanation
Han's Proposition 1.3 computes Hankel determinants modulo 2 for the binary sequence \(u_n=(1-r_n)/2\). Adamczewski and Rivoal construct selected Padé approximants for the signed generating function. Neither cited result states eventual nonvanishing of the leading signed Hankel minors. The signed and binary questions need separate records because reducing entries modulo 2 turns the signed Hankel matrix into an all-ones matrix.
Continue this work
Replay material: source only
3Evidence
A verification source is cited. This record has no executable replay attached.
Verification source: doi.org ↗, Han 2016, Proposition 1.3, pages 2-3; Adamczewski-Rivoal 2009, section 2.2 and Proposition 2.2
4How it connects
Informs
- claim
Recorded for
- problem
Cite this record
Cite the original sources separately.
Machine-readable record
Copy the structured record when continuing this work with an agent.
{
"schema": "theoremdb-agent-record-v1",
"ref": "R687",
"content_hash": null,
"slug": "rsh-claim-signed-binary-distinction",
"type": "claim",
"title": "Published binary formulas do not settle the signed determinant",
"summary": "Han's periodic formula concerns the 0/1 Rudin-Shapiro sequence, while the candidate uses signs in \\(\\{-1,1\\}\\).",
"relevance": "For Nonvanishing of Rudin-Shapiro Hankel determinants, record rsh-claim-signed-binary-distinction (“Published binary formulas do not settle the signed determinant”) records a bound, answer, status fact, or structural consequence. The record states: Han's periodic formula concerns the 0/1 Rudin-Shapiro sequence, while the candidate uses signs in \\(\\{-1,1\\}\\).",
"relevance_source": "recorded",
"body": "Han's Proposition 1.3 computes Hankel determinants modulo 2 for the binary sequence \\(u_n=(1-r_n)/2\\). Adamczewski and Rivoal construct selected Padé approximants for the signed generating function. Neither cited result states eventual nonvanishing of the leading signed Hankel minors. The signed and binary questions need separate records because reducing entries modulo 2 turns the signed Hankel matrix into an all-ones matrix.",
"status": "established",
"evidence_grade": "sourced",
"scope": {
"kind": "universal",
"statement": "the literature comparison for the signed sequence in the candidate"
},
"reproduction": {
"schema": "theoremdb-reproduction-v1",
"readiness": "source_only",
"kind": "claim",
"citation": {
"url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2016.08.013",
"locator": "Han 2016, Proposition 1.3, pages 2-3; Adamczewski-Rivoal 2009, section 2.2 and Proposition 2.2"
},
"missing": [
"source",
"command",
"runtime",
"expected_output"
]
},
"formal_statement": null,
"source": {
"url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2016.08.013",
"locator": "Han 2016, Proposition 1.3, pages 2-3; Adamczewski-Rivoal 2009, section 2.2 and Proposition 2.2"
},
"models": [],
"relations": [
{
"slug": "R688",
"title": "Two residue classes are settled 2-adically",
"object_type": "claim",
"relation": "informs",
"direction": "outgoing"
},
{
"slug": "rudin-shapiro-hankel-nonvanishing",
"title": "rudin shapiro hankel nonvanishing",
"object_type": "problem",
"relation": "recorded_for",
"direction": "outgoing"
}
]
}6Provenance
View source, identifiers, and projection details
A statement this project treats as settled at the recorded evidence grade, with the work that backs it.