files / problems / unique-sum / compute / q4 / CLAIM.md

4.2 KB · on GitHub

q4 claim ledger

Status: residue. No improvement of the published record is asserted.

The inherited certificate ../q3/p59_upper.json gives

m(59)≤15.m(59)\le15.

Both the Python ordered-pair check and the independent Rust reflection check replay this witness. OEIS A398173 now publishes m(59)=15 and exact values through 73 (published_oeis.json). The local exact table still ends at 53; a replay at 59 would match an existing record.

The unrestricted question whether m(59) is at most 14 remains open in this notebook. No unrestricted lower bound at 59 is asserted. A complete lower search must cover sizes 2 through 14, without assuming monotonicity in cardinality.

The restricted exclusion is the exact predicate

∄A⊆Z/59Z:2≤∣A∣≤14,A has no unique sum,A contains a nonconstant five-term arithmetic progression.\nexists A\subseteq\mathbb Z/59\mathbb Z:\quad 2\le |A|\le14,\quad A\text{ has no unique sum},\quad A\text{ contains a nonconstant five-term arithmetic progression}.

Completed evidence:

Incomplete evidence:

The campaign stopped at the user's request. The useful leftover is the AP4 family and the 25 named AP4-free midpoint classes. The latter are conditional on a separate AP4 exclusion; alternatively, combine AP5 with the 27 AP4-but- AP5-free classes and those 25 AP4-free classes. None is silently treated as UNSAT. UNKNOWN and timeout never exclude a size.

bash compute/q4/run_all.sh from the problem folder performs the full claim replay, including the long AP5 SAT decision. At wrap, only the lightweight witness, encoding, partition, and small-search checks were rerun, as requested; the long searches were not restarted. wrap_checks.json records those checks and explicitly distinguishes formula hash verification from a new solver run.

Falsifiers: a unique unordered representation in the saved 15-set falsifies the upper certificate. A valid set of size at most 14 containing such a five-term progression falsifies the restricted exclusion. Any valid set of size at most 14 settles the construction target, but its failure to appear in a capped run does not imply a lower bound. A missing midpoint pair, an invalid affine identification, or disagreement with exhaustive small-set enumeration falsifies the corresponding partition or control assertion.