Formalization review of erdos-51
“Is there an infinite set $A \subset \mathbb{N}$ such that for every $a \in A$, there is an integer n such that $\phi(n)=a$, and yet if $n_a$ is the smallest such integer, then $\frac{n_a}{a} → \infty$ as $a → ∞$?”
Opened 2026-10-13 by network (network) ; state: needs an intent signer · 1 candidate, 1 cluster, 5 questions waiting. Built from the review’s records only; every table below is derived from them, and nothing here is a verdict: the grade is what was signed. How a statement is reviewed →
1 · Candidates
Exhibits: kernel-checked results the gate’s job wrote. Only these are evidence for a grade (D-9 v3.12). A candidate’s Lean is shown as written, every type as its author typed it; nothing here was rendered by a model.
| Candidate and its Lean | Author | Origin | Stage-3 result |
|---|---|---|---|
c-b79d40a0 · 2026-10-13Lean · c-b79d40a0.lean · sha256 | curator — a model's: unnamed (other) | ported from existing erdos-51 | surviving |
2 · Pairs and clusters
Exhibits: each direction between two candidates is proved, refuted (a kernel-checked instance) or open, as the pair records say. Both directions proved put two candidates in one cluster; an open direction is claimable work (F26-R8).
1 cluster among the surviving candidates: {c-b79d40a0}.
No pair has been compared yet.
3 · Questions and answers
Judgements: a question is put to the intent signer in mathematics, and an answer is that person’s word, signed through the site and naming their login. An answer becomes an intent test (section 4); an answer that cites no source is flagged. Never evidence for a grade on its own.
q-1A variant of the statement agrees with it on every small case checked. Is there a case on which the conjecture and this variant should differ?raised by a mutant (
e-3e9eb381), 2026-10-14Waiting for the intent signer: nobody yet: this problem has no steward, so the review needs an intent signer (D-32).
q-2A variant of the statement agrees with it on every small case checked. Is there a case on which the conjecture and this variant should differ?raised by a mutant (
e-7328eb39), 2026-10-14Waiting for the intent signer: nobody yet: this problem has no steward, so the review needs an intent signer (D-32).
q-3A variant of the statement agrees with it on every small case checked. Is there a case on which the conjecture and this variant should differ?raised by a mutant (
e-24a04248), 2026-10-14Waiting for the intent signer: nobody yet: this problem has no steward, so the review needs an intent signer (D-32).
q-4A variant of the statement agrees with it on every small case checked. Is there a case on which the conjecture and this variant should differ?raised by a mutant (
e-ef0faa34), 2026-10-14Waiting for the intent signer: nobody yet: this problem has no steward, so the review needs an intent signer (D-32).
q-5A variant of the statement agrees with it on every small case checked. Is there a case on which the conjecture and this variant should differ?raised by a mutant (
e-d6368ea4), 2026-10-14Waiting for the intent signer: nobody yet: this problem has no steward, so the review needs an intent signer (D-32).
4 · The test matrix
Exhibits: every intent test run against every candidate, kernel-checked, and the mutants of the surviving cluster’s representative the tests caught, as a measure of the tests (F26-R8). No model supplied an expected value: each comes from an answer, a citation or the candidates’ agreement, named per test.
0 of 5 mutants caught by the tests; a mutant every test passed became a question (section 3).
No intent test has been written.
5 · Screens and the brief
Exhibits: the compile and the soundness screens the gate ran on each candidate (D-9 layer 2), kernel-checked. The brief beside them is a model’s judgement and is marked so.
| Candidate | Check | Result | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
c-b79d40a0 | screen | pass | negation: nothing proved within the budget |
c-b79d40a0 | screen | pass | false: nothing proved within the budget |
c-b79d40a0 | compile | pass | elaborates at the pin; small cases do not apply: the claim is a closed proposition, not a predicate on nLean · e-41f7b09d.lean · sha256 |
c-b79d40a0 | screen | pass | statement: nothing proved within the budget |
6 · Signatures
Judgements: a signature is a decision written by a person, by role; the page never computes one (D-9 v3.39). The intent signer answers the questions and signs that the surviving cluster says what the conjecture says; the independent signer reads the Lean and signs that the evidence supports it.
Intent signer: empty — may sign: nobody yet: this problem has no steward, so the review needs an intent signer (D-32).
Independent signer: empty — may sign: anyone who reads Lean, wrote no candidate in the surviving cluster and is not the intent signer.