Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Boris Alexeev, Moe Putterman, Mehtaab Sawhney, Mark Sellke and Gregory Valiant, Short proofs in combinatorics, probability and number theory II, arXiv:2604.06609v1 (8 April 2026), Section 6, answer Problem 1141 in the negative. For a fixed integer call -good when is prime for every integer with and . Theorem 6.1 states that for each fixed only finitely many are -good. The case is the problem's property, so only finitely many have prime for every coprime to with , and the answer to the question is no. The authors attribute the proof to an internal OpenAI model; their comment on the use of AI adds that ChatGPT-5.4 Pro solved Problem 1141 in all five independent attempts they made and, asked as a follow-up, generalized the proof to for every . The paper has a [[../library/discrete_geometry/alexeev_2026_short_proofs_combinatorics_probability_number_theory/_index|library card]].
The argument is a short deduction from Theorem 1.3 of Pollack's paper on prime character nonresidues, carded as [[../library/primes/pollack_2017_bounds_first_several_prime_character_nonresidues/_index|Pollack 2017]]: for , and every large enough modulus , a quadratic character modulo takes the value at at least primes (restated as Theorem 6.3 of the paper for ). Suppose is -good and large, and write with squarefree. When , Pollack's theorem applied to the quadratic character of viewed modulo gives an odd prime with for which has two roots . Every coprime to in one of these two classes makes divide the prime , which forces , an equation with at most one solution . A Möbius count over the prime factors of shows that the number of such is $\frac{2\sqrt{n/a}}{p}\cdot\frac{\varphi(n)}{n}+O(2^{\omega(n)})\gg_a n^{1/8}/\log\log n$, which exceeds for large , a contradiction. When the congruence is solvable for every odd prime not dividing , the least such prime is , and the same count gives admissible . Remark 6.2 notes that the bound is ineffective because Pollack's theorem rests on Siegel's theorem, and that computation suggests is the largest -good .
Reviewed. The site's curator, Thomas Bloom, marks Problem 1141 disproved and credits the resolution to the internal OpenAI model of this paper in the site's commentary (last edited 9 April 2026). The claim has no refereed evidence.
Formalizations. Four Lean files declare themselves formalizations of this
result, following the paper, so they are links on this page and not claims of
their own. The first, posted in the site's thread on 11 April 2026 by Yuta
Oriike and made with GPT-5.4 Pro, proves the formal-conjectures statement and
the -general variant with Pollack's Theorem 1.3 and Mertens' third theorem
taken as axioms; its #print axioms lists those two beside the standard three.
The link pins the revision of 13 April 2026 that updated the reference to
Pollack's theorem, to which the thread post was edited to point; the file was
first uploaded on 11 April 2026. The second, Boris Alexeev's lean-proofs file,
names the model and the five authors as informal authors and GPT-5.4 Pro and
Yuta Oriike as formal authors, and its header marks the proof unconditional; the
pinned commit of 25 August 2026 imported a proof of Pollack's theorem, which the
file takes from ErdosProblems.Erdos1141.PollackTheorem. The same commit adds a
companion, Erdos1141b.lean, which names the same authors and proves the same
statements without Pollack's theorem, from a split prime below
that a weak Burgess estimate supplies. The third, in the erdos-lean repository
that the formal_proof attribute of the formal-conjectures statement names,
inlines the lean-proofs file with its dependencies into one self-contained
file. The second and third contain no sorry, axiom or native_decide token.
The corpus has built none of these files, so the claim lists no formalized
evidence.
Tang's earlier bound of on the number of good , described on the problem page, is not used by the proof.
Depends on. Nothing beyond the cited papers.