Proved
The preliminary draft proves H₁ ≤ 212 ↗
The paper’s unconditional assertion; formalization assumes analytic and variational inputs.
Observed Oct 13, 2026
Bound · version 1
Earlier version 1. View current version 2 →
For every real X, there are consecutive primes p < q with p ≥ X and q − p ≤ 212; in other words H₁ ≤ 212.
An unconditional upper bound on the recurring gap, attributed to the 2026 preliminary draft; it does not imply every gap is this small.
Proved
The paper’s unconditional assertion; formalization assumes analytic and variational inputs.
Observed Oct 13, 2026
In this problem · publication v1
Bound · Proved
Scope: The cited mathematical result bounds recurring consecutive-prime gaps by 212.
Limit: The target H₁ = 2 is not established.
Nested results concern the same prime-gap limit; they are not separate portions of a solved problem.
Relationship not independently reviewed. This concerns its use in this problem.
The preliminary draft states H₁ ≤ 212 and explains the analytic and exact rational calculations. Its appendix reports a formal deduction with analytic and variational hypotheses.
paraphrase · OpenMath supplies original paraphrases and links; no proof text is republished.
François Charton · Letong Hong · Kenny Lau · Ken Ono · Guillaume Remy · Ho Chung Siu · Ashvin A. Swaminathan · Jesse Thorner · Yunzhou Xie · Preprint · Publication date Sep 3, 2026
Public manuscript or exposition; publication does not imply independent OpenMath review.
Source revision: 2026-09-03. Observed Oct 13, 2026.
The nine authors supply the mathematics, building on Julia Stadlmann and earlier sieve work. AxiomProver is credited with generating a formal deduction; this is not a claim that the model independently discovered the mathematical bound.
Source updated Sep 3, 2026.
The published Polymath8b argument establishes an unconditional recurring prime gap at most 246; the twin-prime target remains out of reach.
paraphrase · OpenMath supplies original paraphrases and links; no proof text is republished.
D. H. J. Polymath · Published · Publication date 2014
Peer-reviewed historical result.
Source revision: 2014. Observed Oct 13, 2026.
No AI contribution is asserted by this source record.
Statement versions and problem publication versions are separate. A new publication can update context or sources while retaining the same statement.
Assessments retained in these publication records. Earlier statement versions retain their own source histories.
Proved
The paper’s unconditional assertion; formalization assumes analytic and variational inputs.
Observed Oct 13, 2026 · Source passage →