TheoremDB

Problem packetResearch packetR745

R745Computational evidence

All 492 comparisons through n=1000 are strict increases

View evidenceOpen source ↗
Link to a section

Authored summary

Exact coefficient extraction and integer comparison find no counterexample between admissible indices 16 and 1000.

The record reports a computation within its stated scope.

Recorded status: supported

Recorded scope: all consecutive admissible indices a<b with 16<=a<b<=1000

Complete recorded scope and conditions
{
  "kind": "bounded",
  "statement": "all consecutive admissible indices a<b with 16<=a<b<=1000",
  "bounds": {
    "minimum_n": {
      "min": 16,
      "max": 16
    },
    "maximum_n": {
      "min": 1000,
      "max": 1000
    },
    "comparisons": {
      "min": 492,
      "max": 492
    }
  },
  "exhaustive": true
}

Originating problem: Eventual monotonicity in a signed subset-sum local limit

Recorded relationships: The all-n monotonicity claim remains unresolved in this audit

Authored record and scope
Authored title
All 492 comparisons through n=1000 are strict increases
Record type
claim
Stored status
supported
Evidence grade
computational
Recorded scope data
{ "kind": "bounded", "statement": "all consecutive admissible indices a<b with 16<=a<b<=1000", "bounds": { "minimum_n": { "min": 16, "max": 16 }, "maximum_n": { "min": 1000, "max": 1000 }, "comparisons": { "min": 492, "max": 492 } }, "exhaustive": true }
Linked research record IDs
R743

2Authored explanation

The exhaustive replay constructs every coefficient polynomial through \(F_{1000}\) and extracts \(C_n\) at each of the 500 positive admissible indices up to 1000. It checks the sign of the cleared integer margin for every adjacent pair.

All 492 comparisons beginning at \(n=16\) are positive. The normalized endpoints include \[ A_{16}=0.775498980775123\ldots, \] \[ A_{999}=0.797525249765113\ldots, \qquad A_{1000}=0.797525608979770\ldots. \] As a check on the earlier behavior, the complete list of decreases through 1000 is \[ 3\to4,\qquad 8\to11,\qquad 15\to16. \] The count at \(n=200\) is `780463610226751719065842218999070243255558586796769387244`, matching the candidate's prior computation.

Continue this work
Replay material: source only

3Evidence

Replay package: source only

A verification source is cited. This record has no executable replay attached.

Verification source: cs.uwaterloo.ca ↗, Independent exact computation in ssclt-artifact-bitpacked-dp, executed 2026-07-24

4What was measured

5How it connects

Verifies (incoming)

Recorded for

Machine-readable record

Copy the structured record when continuing this work with an agent.

json
{
  "schema": "theoremdb-agent-record-v1",
  "ref": "R745",
  "content_hash": null,
  "slug": "ssclt-claim-strict-through-1000",
  "type": "claim",
  "title": "All 492 comparisons through n=1000 are strict increases",
  "summary": "Exact coefficient extraction and integer comparison find no counterexample between admissible indices 16 and 1000.",
  "relevance": "For Eventual monotonicity in a signed subset-sum local limit, record ssclt-claim-strict-through-1000 (“All 492 comparisons through n=1000 are strict increases”) records a bound, answer, status fact, or structural consequence. The record states: Exact coefficient extraction and integer comparison find no counterexample between admissible indices 16 and 1000.",
  "relevance_source": "recorded",
  "body": "The exhaustive replay constructs every coefficient polynomial through \\(F_{1000}\\) and extracts \\(C_n\\) at each of the 500 positive admissible indices up to 1000. It checks the sign of the cleared integer margin for every adjacent pair.\n\nAll 492 comparisons beginning at \\(n=16\\) are positive. The normalized endpoints include\n\\[\nA_{16}=0.775498980775123\\ldots,\n\\]\n\\[\nA_{999}=0.797525249765113\\ldots,\n\\qquad\nA_{1000}=0.797525608979770\\ldots.\n\\]\nAs a check on the earlier behavior, the complete list of decreases through 1000 is\n\\[\n3\\to4,\\qquad 8\\to11,\\qquad 15\\to16.\n\\]\nThe count at \\(n=200\\) is\n`780463610226751719065842218999070243255558586796769387244`,\nmatching the candidate's prior computation.",
  "status": "supported",
  "evidence_grade": "computational",
  "scope": {
    "kind": "bounded",
    "statement": "all consecutive admissible indices a<b with 16<=a<b<=1000",
    "bounds": {
      "minimum_n": {
        "min": 16,
        "max": 16
      },
      "maximum_n": {
        "min": 1000,
        "max": 1000
      },
      "comparisons": {
        "min": 492,
        "max": 492
      }
    },
    "exhaustive": true
  },
  "reproduction": {
    "schema": "theoremdb-reproduction-v1",
    "readiness": "source_only",
    "kind": "claim",
    "citation": {
      "url": "https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/journals/JIS/VOL16/Sullivan/sullivan8.html",
      "locator": "Independent exact computation in ssclt-artifact-bitpacked-dp, executed 2026-07-24"
    },
    "missing": [
      "source",
      "command",
      "runtime",
      "expected_output"
    ]
  },
  "formal_statement": null,
  "source": {
    "url": "https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/journals/JIS/VOL16/Sullivan/sullivan8.html",
    "locator": "Independent exact computation in ssclt-artifact-bitpacked-dp, executed 2026-07-24"
  },
  "models": [],
  "relations": [
    {
      "slug": "R744",
      "title": "Each monotonicity comparison reduces to an integer inequality",
      "object_type": "claim",
      "relation": "supports",
      "direction": "incoming"
    },
    {
      "slug": "R741",
      "title": "Bit-packed exact subset-sum computation through n=1000",
      "object_type": "artifact",
      "relation": "verifies",
      "direction": "incoming"
    },
    {
      "slug": "R743",
      "title": "The all-n monotonicity claim remains unresolved in this audit",
      "object_type": "claim",
      "relation": "supports",
      "direction": "outgoing"
    },
    {
      "slug": "signed-subset-sum-local-clt-monotone",
      "title": "signed subset sum local clt monotone",
      "object_type": "problem",
      "relation": "recorded_for",
      "direction": "outgoing"
    }
  ]
}

7Provenance

View source, identifiers, and projection details

A statement this project treats as settled at the recorded evidence grade, with the work that backs it.

Sign in to follow

Sign in in another tab, then return here.

Open sign-in in another tab

Report a problem

Report location:

Your ChatGPT account

Opening ChatGPT

ChatGPT is opening in a new tab.